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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds behavioral detail by specifying the returned fields (id, method, path, status, bodies) and the 'recent' qualifier, which sets expectations about scope and output.

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 no redundancy. It efficiently conveys purpose and return fields.

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, scope, and return fields. With no output schema and only one parameter, this is largely sufficient. It could mention pagination or limits, but 'recent' hints at a bounded set.

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 0%, and the description doesn't explicitly link the 'subdomain' parameter to the tunnel mentioned. However, the phrase 'for a tunnel' implies the subdomain identifies which tunnel, providing some semantic context.

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 lists recent webhooks/requests captured for a tunnel, specifying the action (list) and the resource (captured requests). It also lists the return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_request (single) and list_tunnels.

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 provides clear context: use it to list recent captured requests for a tunnel. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous enough to guide tool selection.

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