hound_preinstall

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses return type (go/no-go verdict) and checks performed but omits whether the tool is read-only, requires network access, or what happens on failure. Not misleading but leaves gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second lists checks and return type. Efficiently conveys essential info.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, checks, and return type. Lacks specificity on how the verdict is represented (e.g., boolean) and whether the tool is purely read-only. Still fairly complete for a tool with simple parameters and no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Tool description does not add meaningful parameter-level information beyond what schema already provides (name, version, ecosystem).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it's a safety check that combines multiple aspects (vulnerabilities, typosquatting, abandonment, license) and distinguishes it from siblings like hound_vulns or hound_typosquat, which focus on individual checks.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implies usage before installing a package ("Safety check before installing a package") but does not explicitly state when to use this comprehensive check versus the specific sibling tools, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.