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

Adds valuable behavior beyond annotations: it sends a POST, produces a status to inspect, and includes a security guardrail about not dumping the Authorization value. Annotations already signal a non-idempotent operation, and the description complements them without contradiction.

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?

Three short, purposeful sentences with the main action front-loaded. There is no filler, and every sentence adds operational value.

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 single-parameter test tool, it covers the action, the result field to check, and an important safety constraint. Without an output schema, naming webhook_last_status is a helpful return-value hint, though full response or error cases are not enumerated.

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 already describes the only parameter, token, with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter-level detail. It contributes no new parameter semantics, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

States the specific action (POST a sample event) and the target resource (the webhook already set), which clearly distinguishes it from set_webhook. The phrase 'you already set' removes ambiguity about scope.

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?

Clearly implies it is used after a webhook has already been configured, and gives a follow-up instruction to check webhook_last_status. It does not explicitly name an alternative or give when-not-to-use conditions, but the intended usage context is evident.

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