shelly_webhook_update

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

The description adds 'Audit-logged' which is beyond the idempotentHint annotation. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like permissions, idempotency implications, or failure behaviors. The addition is minimal but non-contradictory.

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 sentences with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the primary action and includes the critical behavioral note about audit logging.

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 (2 required) and siblings that create/delete/list, the description is too sparse. It omits how to use optional parameters effectively, what happens when updating non-existent webhooks, or the overall impact of updates. An output schema exists but is not described.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameter roles. It only mentions 'id' as the identifier, but does not clarify the optionality or semantics of parameters like 'name', 'urls', 'enable', etc. The schema structure is left entirely for the agent to infer.

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 action ('Update fields') and the resource ('existing webhook'), and identifies a key differentiator ('Audit-logged'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, and list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions under which this operation is appropriate. It only mentions audit-logging, which is behavioral, not usage-oriented.

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