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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; 'List' implies a safe read, and 'Secrets are not returned' is a genuinely useful disclosure about the response payload that no structured field supplies. It stops short of covering pagination, ordering, or whether delivery counts span a fixed recent window.

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, both front-loaded: what is returned first, the security caveat second. No filler and nothing an agent must wade through.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource, the returned fields of interest, and the notable exclusion of secrets. Only the meaning of shop_id and any paging behavior remain unstated.

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 0% for the single required shop_id parameter. The phrase 'a shop's' hints that shop_id scopes the listing, but the description adds no format, source, or constraint details to compensate for the undocumented schema.

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 ('List a shop's webhook endpoints') plus the returned payload ('their recent delivery counts'), so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It doesn't explicitly contrast with webhooks_deliveries or homeowner_webhookList, so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. An agent must infer from the verb 'List' alone that this is the read path versus webhooks_create, webhooks_delete, or webhooks_deliveries.

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