getWebhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description only states the operation ('Get a webhook by ID') without disclosing return format, error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), or whether it is read-only. This leaves the agent with insufficient behavioral context.

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 sentence of six words, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is essential; no filler or redundant information. It earns full marks for conciseness.

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?

This is a simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema. The description covers the core purpose but omits details about the response structure (e.g., what fields are returned) and error handling. It is adequate but not fully complete without those details.

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 100% (id described as 'Webhook ID'). The description adds 'by ID' but this is redundant with the schema. No additional semantic meaning (e.g., origin, constraints) is provided, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a webhook by ID' uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'webhook' with a clear scope (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like listWebhooks (listing all) and getWebhookEvents (events for a 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?

The usage is implied: you use this tool when you have a specific webhook ID and want its details. However, the description does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., listWebhooks to find IDs) or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it only partially guides selection.

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