get_webhook

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

The description adds one behavioral trait: the signing secret is redacted. However, without annotations, the description should disclose more about what happens (e.g., error on invalid id, return format). The single note is insufficient for full transparency.

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?

One short sentence with a parenthetical clarification. Front-loaded with verb and resource. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return structure. It only mentions the redacted secret, but fails to indicate other typical fields (e.g., URL, events). The description is adequate but incomplete for a GET tool.

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?

Input schema already describes both parameters completely (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

Description clearly states the action 'Get', resource 'webhook endpoint', and scope 'one...by id'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_webhooks (which lists all) and other CRUD operations.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied (when you need details of a specific webhook), but no when-not or comparison with siblings is provided.

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