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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this is a safe read. The description adds that results are scoped to survey-event webhooks and identifies the underlying endpoint (GET /management/webhooks), but says nothing about pagination defaults or return shape.

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 resource scope front-loaded before the endpoint reference. The API-reference clause is mildly expendable but still aids endpoint identification.

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 zero-required-parameter list tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description covers the essentials. It is slightly thin on what a returned webhook record contains, but not deficient for this complexity level.

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 skip, limit, order, sortBy and surveyIds are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates the surveyIds filtering behavior, adding no syntax or meaning beyond the schema baseline.

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 (List) and resource (webhooks) plus the scope condition that they fire on survey events. It does not differentiate itself from siblings such as formbricks_get_webhook (single) or formbricks_create_webhook, though the naming makes the distinction fairly obvious.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered to specific surveys' implies when the surveyIds filter is appropriate, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or pointer to formbricks_get_webhook for retrieving a single webhook.

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