list_webhooks

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

No annotations were provided; the description adds the behavioral detail that no secrets are returned, which is helpful. However, it lacks information about authentication requirements, rate limits, or other operational constraints. For a simple list operation, this is minimally adequate.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'List', contains no extraneous words, and is perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 no output schema and no parameters, the description covers the core functionality and a key behavior (no secrets). It is mostly complete, though it could mention if pagination or ordering is supported for better completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter semantics, so the baseline of 4 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 clearly states the action 'list' and the resource 'registered webhook endpoints', with an additional clarifying note about not including secrets. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'register_webhook' or other mutation tools.

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 implies usage for viewing existing webhooks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'register_webhook' (creation) or 'delete_webhook' (not present). No when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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