salvar_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions create/update semantics but omits details like default values for optional fields, what happens on conflicting updates, permission requirements, or side effects. The agent lacks insight into destructive potential or rate limits.

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 short with bullet points for observations, making it easy to scan. However, it could be more concise by removing the redundant 'Observacoes' heading and integrating hints more tightly. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers basic create/update logic and hints for two parameters but neglects explaining url, nome, ativo, return values, and validation rules. The agent may not understand how to fully leverage the tool.

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%, yet the description only adds meaning for id (via update usage) and action_id (via reference to another tool). It fails to explain url, nome, and ativo parameters. The entidade hint is useful but insufficient to cover the 6 parameters adequately.

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 creates or updates a webhook in Ploomes CRM, specifying the resource (webhook) and the action (create/update). It distinguishes from siblings like buscar_webhooks (list) and excluir_webhook (delete).

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?

Description provides helpful pointers: use buscar_webhooks to get existing IDs for updates, use buscar_acoes_webhook for ActionId, and clarifies that entidade is the entity name with examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives beyond the ones mentioned.

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