Update webhook

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the specific fields that can be changed but does not disclose whether the update is partial or full, nor any permission requirements. It adds some value beyond annotations but leaves room for behavioral ambiguity.

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 that front-loads the core actions. It is information-dense with zero wasted words, and each element 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?

For a simple update tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main use cases (rename, avatar, move channel). The schema handles the required 'webhook' parameter and guild default behavior. It lacks explicit mention of partial-update semantics, but the tool is straightforward enough that the description is adequate.

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?

The description bridges the gap for parameters not covered by the schema: 'rename' maps to 'name', 'change avatar' maps to 'avatar_url', and 'move' maps to 'channel'. This compensates for the schema's 60% description coverage, making the parameters more meaningful than the schema alone.

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 uses a specific verb ('rename', 'change', 'move') tied to the resource ('webhook') and clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_webhook, delete_webhook, and send_webhook_message by listing concrete update operations.

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 makes it clear this tool is for modifying an existing webhook, with no ambiguity about when to use it. It doesn't explicitly exclude other operations or name alternatives, but the context is strong enough that an agent would know to use it for renaming, changing avatars, or moving channels.

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