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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint as false, establishing a safe read operation. The description adds a critical behavioral detail—'secrets are never returned'—which is beyond what annotations provide and is important for security expectations. This enriches the agent's understanding of the tool's guarantees.

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, tightly crafted sentence. It front-loads the core action ('List registered webhooks') and then appends the additional useful qualifiers ('with delivery health', 'secrets are never returned') without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity—no parameters, no required fields, and an existing output schema—the description is sufficient. It conveys the essential purpose and the key security constraint. Since the output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return structure, and nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. Per the rubric, 0 params yields a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since the schema is empty and coverage is 100%.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'webhooks', and adds specific context: 'with delivery health' and the security note that secrets are never returned. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like webhooks_set and webhooks_delete without ambiguity.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that webhooks_set is for creating or that webhooks_delete is for removal, nor any situational context. The usage is implied by the verb 'List' but there is no direct comparison or exclusion.

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