List webhook subscriptions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations: 'Stored authentication material is never returned'—a meaningful security guarantee for agents. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence identifies the purpose and the returned fields; the second adds a security-relevant behavior. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with no required parameters, the description covers purpose, return fields, and a key security aspect. However, it doesn't explain cursor-based pagination or describe the response envelope, and there is no output schema to fill that gap. A modest addition would make it fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the two optional parameters. It doesn't mention cursor at all, leaving its pagination behavior unclear, and doesn't explain pageSize behavior beyond what the schema's min/max provide. The description thus fails to fill the schema gap.

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 uses the specific verb 'Lists', identifies the resource as the organization's webhook subscriptions, and enumerates the exact returned fields (name, endpoint, HTTP method, status, subscribed events). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as jisr_audit_events_list or jisr_departments_list by target resource.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives—no 'use this when...' statement or exclusions. The purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer usage, but the description itself does not state the selection criteria.

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