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

The description mentions the required authentication key ('Requires FUSEBOX_SECRET_API_KEY'), which is useful. However, it does not disclose other behavioral details such as whether the update is partial or full replacement, side effects, or error conditions. With no annotations, this is a moderate disclosure.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action. The second sentence adds necessary authentication context. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers purpose and authentication but lacks details on behavior (e.g., whether the update is incremental) and response information. Given no output schema and no annotations, this is adequate but has clear gaps.

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% with each parameter having a description. The description adds 'URL or event type' but the schema requires both parameters, creating a slight mismatch. No additional parameter-level context is provided beyond the schema.

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 action ('Update'), the resource ('a Fusebox Notification webhook'), and the specific updatable fields ('URL or event type'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, delete, or get webhooks.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool (to update a webhook's URL or event type). While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, the sibling tools naturally cover other operations, making usage context clear.

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