zernio_update_webhook

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral transparency. It states 'Update' which implies mutation, but does not disclose whether parameters are partial updates (fields omitted unchanged) or require all fields. No information about auth requirements, rate limits, or side effects is provided.

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 concise sentence without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, the brevity comes at the cost of omitting critical context, preventing a higher score.

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's complexity (3 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to identify which webhook to update (e.g., missing ID parameter in schema) or what the response looks like. The agent would lack essential context to use the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description lists the fields, which adds minimal redundancy. It does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 that the tool updates webhook settings like URL, events, or secret. The verb 'update' combined with the resource 'webhook settings' makes the purpose specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools such as create_webhook or delete_webhook, though it could be more explicit about operating on an existing webhook.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., creating a new webhook, testing, or deleting). The description lacks any mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a webhook ID) or when not to use it, leaving the agent without sufficient context to choose correctly.

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