HackTricks Table of Contents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description's contribution ('top-level overview' vs. 'expand a category') largely duplicates the schema, and with an output schema present there is no need to describe returns. Some value, but not rich behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, no padding, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the invocation detail and the workflow hint. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-optional-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies purpose, both calling modes, and intended workflow. It is essentially complete; only an explicit sibling contrast would strengthen it further.

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% with one optional parameter whose meaning ('Optional category name to expand... Omit for top-level overview') is already fully documented in the schema. The description restates the same omit/pass behavior without adding format, syntax, or example detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the HackTricks wiki structure: categories and page tree,' which precisely describes a table-of-contents retrieval. It hints at the search sibling with 'before searching,' but does not name or contrast itself against hacktricks_search or hacktricks_get_page explicitly, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives clear invocation guidance for both modes ('Call without arguments for the top-level overview, or pass a category to see its pages') and positions the tool in a workflow ('understand where a topic lives before searching'). It stops short of naming the alternative tools or stating when not to use this one.

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