billy_create_webhook

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

The description discloses that the tool is a WRITE operation and that confirm:true is needed for actual execution, contrasting with a dry-run default. This adds essential behavioral context beyond the absent annotations.

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 that cover purpose, usage warning, and parameter shape without any redundant wording.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description adequately covers the confirm behavior and webhook structure. However, it lacks details like possible event values or response format, which are not critical for basic invocation.

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 schema covers confirm with good detail, but the webhook object is minimally specified (additionalProperties: true). The description compensates by providing the shape '{ url, event, isActive? }', adding meaning to the nested parameter.

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 states 'Create a webhook' with a shape hint, clearly indicating the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like billy_list_webhooks and billy_delete_webhook, but does not elaborate on the webhook's function.

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 explicitly notes 'WRITE — requires confirm:true', guiding the agent on the necessary flag to execute the mutation. It does not provide when-not or alternatives, but there is no direct sibling for creating webhooks.

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