edubase_post_organization_webhook_trigger

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and don't conflict. The description adds the trigger_event constraint but does not explain what happens when triggered (e.g., HTTP request sent, side effects, success/failure behavior). Given the sparse annotations, it would benefit from more behavioral context.

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 sentences, front-loaded with action and resource, and a concise condition. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool with 3 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose and key constraint. However, it lacks details like what the trigger does (e.g., sends HTTP request), required permissions, or error handling. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters with clear descriptions. The description adds only 'with optional custom payload', which matches the data parameter. No additional meaning beyond schema is provided, so baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Trigger'), the resource ('organizational webhook call'), and includes a crucial constraint ('Only triggers webhooks with trigger_event set to api!'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like delete or patch webhook 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 explicitly states a key usage condition ('Only triggers webhooks with trigger_event set to api!'), which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not provide explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the condition itself is clear.

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