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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It reveals the scope (user's account) and the return fields (URL, subscribed events, active status), indicating a read-only operation. However, it does not discuss pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which are absent but not critical for this simple list.

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 two sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every sentence serves a purpose, covering both the operation and the expected output.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the return values and scope. It could mention ordering or potential limits, but these are not essential for a straightforward list operation.

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 has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so no parameter explanation is needed. The description adds no parameter details, but the baseline for zero params is 4.

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's function: listing webhook endpoints for the user's account. It specifies the resource (webhook endpoints) and the action (list), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_webhook or list_webhook_deliveries by focusing on the endpoints themselves.

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 implies usage by stating it lists all webhook endpoints for the account, which tells an agent when to invoke it. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_webhook_deliveries for delivery history.

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