List the org's webhook subscriptions with their subscribed event types and active state. Signing secrets are never returned. Requires an org-level API key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results to return | |
| offset | No | Pagination offset |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that signing secrets are never returned (important privacy note) and that an org-level API key is required. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe pagination behavior beyond schema.
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?
The description is extremely concise: two sentences with zero wasted words. The key information (what is listed, what is not returned, auth requirement) is front-loaded and efficient.
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?
Given the absence of an output schema, the description gives a reasonable overview (list of subscriptions, event types, active state, no signing secrets). However, it does not mention whether the response includes IDs, URLs, or other fields, and does not clarify ordering or result structure. Middle-of-the-road completeness.
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?
The input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (limit, offset) with descriptions, so the description does not need to add more. It adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, thus baseline score 3 is appropriate.
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 verb 'List' and the resource 'the org's webhook subscriptions', and specifies what is included (subscribed event types and active state) and excluded (signing secrets). It differentiates from siblings like get_webhook (single) and create_webhook.
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?
The description includes an important prerequisite ('Requires an org-level API key'), but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_webhook or for filtering. Usage context is implied but not directly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear descriptions that differentiate overlapping operations like cancel_event vs release_event and find_meeting_time vs get_availability.
All 54 tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_calendar, list_events, delete_webhook), with no mixing of styles or vague verbs.
With 54 tools, the server is over-scoped; the rubric considers 25+ tools as 'too many' for typical purposes, making navigation and selection harder without justification for such granularity.
The toolset provides full CRUD for agents, calendars, events, booking pages, proposals, webhooks, and iCal subscriptions, plus specialized operations like hold management, proposal resolution, and admin functions, leaving no obvious gaps.