List webhook endpoints

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows it is safe and possibly not exhaustive. The description adds only the scope requirement, no further behavioral traits (e.g., response format, pagination). With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description is one concise sentence that front-loads the core action. No unnecessary words, and it efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and prerequisite.

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 list tool with no parameters and annotations present, the description is largely complete. It lacks explicit mention of return format (e.g., a list), but the title and context make it inferable. Still adequate.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. Per instructions, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. Description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists webhook endpoints, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hellio_create_webhook (create) and others (get balance, etc.). The required scope adds clarity.

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 mentions the required 'webhooks' scope as a precondition, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any usage context beyond the scope requirement.

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