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

Description implies a read-only operation ('Returns current status'), but annotation readOnlyHint=false contradicts this. The generic SAP execution guidance adds no tool-specific behavioral detail. This contradiction is a critical flaw.

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 core two sentences are concise, but the large block of generic SAP execution guidance (repeated from input schema) is unnecessary and clutters the description. Removing it would improve conciseness.

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?

While output schema exists, the description does not explain return format or error states. The contradictory readOnlyHint leaves agents uncertain about side effects. Complete guidance is missing for a simple status-check tool.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description mentions 'delivery stats and recent delivery attempt records' which relates to includeDeliveries, but adds minimal new information beyond schema. Baseline 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 tool 'Returns the current status of a webhook subscription' with specifics about delivery stats and recent attempt records. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sap_premium_webhook_register or sap_premium_webhook_relay.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., after registration, to check delivery). The description lacks context for appropriate invocation timing or prerequisites.

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