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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already tells the agent this is a mutating operation, so the description's remaining burden is lighter, but it adds almost nothing beyond the API path note ('Formbricks v2: POST /management/webhooks'). It omits idempotency, whether duplicate URLs are rejected, auth requirements, and what the call returns, which matter for a registration endpoint.

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 short sentences with the operation stated first and no padding or repetition. The trailing API-path sentence is mild metadata rather than a burden, keeping it tight overall.

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 6-parameter, 5-required mutation with no output schema, the description covers the what but leaves the return value (e.g. the created webhook id), failure modes, and auth context unaddressed. Adequate but with clear gaps for an agent that must call it correctly.

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%, so required fields (name, url, workspaceId, triggers, surveyIds) and optional environmentId are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format, or default-value detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Register a webhook') plus the event scope ('fires on survey events'), which cleanly separates it from siblings like formbricks_delete_webhook, formbricks_list_webhooks, and formbricks_get_webhook. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to choose it over alternatives or any prerequisites (e.g. that a webhook must be deleted via formbricks_delete_webhook before re-registering). Usage is only implied by the verb 'register'.

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