create_webhook

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden, and it discloses the key one-time secret behavior and the persistent side effect of creating an endpoint. It could mention auth or full response contents, but the most operationally critical behavior is surfaced.

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 with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and the secret warning earns its place.

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 simple create operation with a complete parameter schema, it says everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly and handle the signing secret. It does not spell out the full response schema or webhook ID, but no output schema is available and the critical return value is highlighted.

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 documents both parameters completely (100% coverage), and the description adds no additional parameter-level detail. Per the baseline for high schema coverage, a 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 names a specific action and resource: 'Create a webhook endpoint (POST /webhooks).' This clearly differentiates it from webhook siblings like list_webhooks, update_webhook, delete_webhook, and rotate_webhook_secret.

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 establishes when to use it — when creating a webhook — and adds an important consumer warning that the signing secret is only returned once. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the create-vs-manage context is clear from the sibling set.

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