list_webhooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes a read-only operation but does not add behavioral details such as side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements beyond the schema. The description is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and uses a bullet-style 'Use when' section, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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?

Despite having no annotations, the description covers the essential usage context. There is an output schema (not shown but present), so return value explanation is not needed. All three parameters are optional and well-documented in the schema. The description is complete for a simple list 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 100%—all parameters already have descriptions. The main description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline is 3 for high 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 clearly states 'List all your webhooks' with a specific verb and resource. It also provides usage scenarios. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_webhook, the purpose is clear and distinctive enough.

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 explicitly provides 'Use when' conditions for two common use cases: viewing all endpoints and finding webhook_id for monitors. It doesn't mention when not to use or alternatives, but the guidance is sufficiently clear for an agent.

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