get_webhooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation ('get all webhooks'), implying non-destructive behavior, but doesn't mention whether webhooks are ordered, paginated, or what fields they return. The description offers minimal behavioral context beyond a read hint.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation. Could arguably be more descriptive, but for a single-parameter read tool, the conciseness is appropriate.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description does reasonable but minimal work. It doesn't describe potential edge cases like empty results, pagination behavior, or error conditions. Given the low complexity, this is adequate but leaves room for more completeness.

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% and there is only one parameter (team_id) which is clearly described as 'The workspace/team ID'. The description adds 'for a workspace' which aligns with the parameter meaning, but adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate for full schema coverage.

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 'Get all webhooks for a workspace' states a clear verb ('get') and resource ('webhooks') scoped to a workspace. However, it doesn't distinguish from siblings like create_webhook, update_webhook, and delete_webhook, though the verb 'get' and plurality 'all webhooks' offer some differentiation from mutations.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of pagination, result limits, or mention that this is a read operation listing all webhooks. No exclusions or alternatives are named, such as distinguishing from get_workspaces or other list-type tools.

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