hires_list_job_webhooks

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

With no annotations, the description itself must convey safety and behavior. The verb 'List' implies a non-destructive read operation, and the scope is specified, but the description does not disclose any additional behaviors such as pagination, required permissions, or the exact response structure. It is adequate but lacks rich contextual detail.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word contributes meaning—no filler, no repetition of the tool name, and no unnecessary detail.

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 (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose and usage context. It could be more complete by mentioning the response format or whether it returns details needed for auditing, but it is not significantly deficient for a basic 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 input schema already fully describes the only parameter (id) as 'Job ID (numeric) or alias' with 100% coverage. The description adds no further semantic detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('webhooks'), and a scope ('job-level events'), which immediately distinguishes it from the sibling 'hires_list_webhooks' (likely all webhooks) and from create/delete webhook tools. It fully states what the tool does.

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 'Use to audit subscriptions and deployment state' provides clear context on when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the scope is so clearly stated that an agent can infer it is for job-specific webhooks rather than global webhooks.

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