github_orgs_update_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, and the description omits behavioral traits such as permissions required, error handling, idempotency, or whether the update is partial or full replacement. The agent lacks critical information for safe invocation.

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 only one sentence, which is too brief for a mutation tool. It under-specifies, lacking essential details that would make the description valuable.

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 complexity of updating a webhook with a free-form body and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, allowed body fields, or behavioral effects, making it difficult for an agent to use correctly.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with basic descriptions (org, hook_id, body). However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, and the 'body' parameter is an unconstrained JSON object without specification of allowed properties, leaving the agent uncertain about valid content.

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 'Update an organization webhook' clearly identifies the verb (update) and resource (organization webhook). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, and get, but does not differentiate from the similar 'github_orgs_update_webhook_config_for_org', which might cause confusion.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'github_orgs_update_webhook_config_for_org' or prerequisites for updating a webhook.

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