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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the scope of listing 'all registered webhooks for a wallet address', but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether it returns full webhook objects or only summaries, pagination, or ordering. It does not contradict the 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Every word adds value: 'List' identifies the operation, 'all registered webhooks' specifies the resource, and 'for a wallet address' sets the scope.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states what it lists and the required scope. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit return shape (e.g., array of webhook objects), but the phrasing 'List all' implies this naturally.

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%: the sole parameter walletAddress is fully described in the schema. The description mentions 'wallet address' but does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. 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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'webhooks' and scope 'for a wallet address'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like register_webhook and delete_webhook, which perform different actions on the same resource.

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 implies this tool is for displaying webhooks of a given wallet, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives such as register_webhook or delete_webhook. The context is clear enough for a simple read operation, but lacks explicit 'when to use' guidance.

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