List webhook destinations

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a non-obvious behavioral fact beyond structured data: custom header names are returned but never their values — a privacy guarantee an agent would otherwise not know. Pagination and result shape remain undisclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the primary purpose first, the optional filters second, and the header-value caveat last. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 two-param read-only list tool with no output schema, the essentials are present: what is listed, how it is scoped, and a key caveat about header values. Missing only minor items such as pagination and the exact returned fields.

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%, so the description carries the full burden, and it does explain both parameters: monitorId scopes to one Monitor, jobId scopes to a crawl or batch task. The phrasing "jobId, the taskId" is slightly ambiguous about whether those are the same identifier, and it doesn't state whether the two filters are mutually exclusive.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ("List webhook destinations") and immediately qualifies scope by filter. An agent can distinguish it from create/pause/resume destination siblings by the verb alone, though no sibling is named explicitly and the potentially confusable list_deliveries is not addressed.

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?

It states that filtering is optional and maps the two filter modes (per-Monitor vs per crawl/batch), which is genuine usage context. However, it never says when to prefer this over list_deliveries or get_delivery, nor what happens if both filters are supplied, so routing guidance is only implied.

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