update_webhook

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true, which partially covers safety. The description adds minor behavioral detail like 'pause/resume' for status, but does not disclose other behaviors (e.g., return format, authentication needs). This is adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the specific fields. No wasted words; every phrase 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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, a simple schema, and an idempotency annotation, the description covers the essential use case. It doesn't mention response shape, but no output schema exists and the description still provides sufficient context for an update 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that status updates correspond to pause/resume behavior, going beyond the schema enum definitions. Other parameters are adequately covered by the 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?

The description clearly states the tool updates a webhook and lists specific changeable elements (delivery URL, topic, status, secret). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_webhook, get_webhook, and delete_webhook.

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 description explains when to use the tool ('Use to change delivery URL, topic, status (pause/resume), or secret'), implying modification of existing webhooks. It doesn't explicitly state exclusions, but the purpose is clear enough in context.

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