Send webhook message

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

Annotations indicate a non-readonly, non-destructive write operation. The description adds useful behavioral context: mentions are suppressed and display name/avatar overrides are optional. However, it does not disclose permission requirements or other side effects beyond these features.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action, with no redundant wording. Every phrase adds value.

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?

With no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the core function and key features but omits return behavior, permission requirements, and explicit usage prerequisites. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 50%, and the description partially compensates by explaining username_override and avatar_url_override as display name and avatar override, while also implying content carries mentions. Yet parameters like content and embeds remain largely dependent on schema descriptions, which are minimal.

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 action ('Post through a webhook') and the resource (webhook message), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_message by noting webhook-specific overrides (display name, avatar) and mention suppression. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus send_message, send_dm, or other messaging tools. Usage is implied by the webhook context, but exclusions or alternative tools are not mentioned.

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