hound_typosquat

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

The description indicates a read operation (checking registry) and variant generation. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on rate limits, authentication, or output behavior. The behavioral commitment is moderate.

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 that directly state the purpose and mechanism. No fluff, front-loaded, and every word adds value.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers the essential functionality. It could mention output format or interpretation, but it's fairly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully describes parameters. The description adds no extra semantic context beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: checking if a package name is a typosquat of a popular package, and it generates variants to check. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hound_inspect or hound_popular.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or comparison with siblings, leaving the agent to infer context.

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