pfm_create_webhook

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It discloses that a secret is returned and should be stored to verify incoming requests via the 'Post-For-Me-Webhook-Secret' header, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes only essential details (secret verification and event list). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple schema (2 required params) and no output schema, the description covers the essential points: purpose, return secret, and supported events. It does not explain the full response format or error cases, but for a create webhook tool this is reasonably 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 coverage is 100% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it repeats the event list, which is already in the schema's event_types description.

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 clearly states the tool creates a webhook to receive event notifications. It uses a specific verb (create) and resource (webhook), and lists the available event types, making its purpose distinct from sibling tools like update/delete/get webhooks.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to create a webhook for event notifications. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and the sibling tools for updating/deleting are implicitly differentiated.

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