clio_list_webhooks

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions routing and scope. It does not disclose read-only nature, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what the output contains. Lacks critical behavioral context for a list operation.

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 concise (two sentences plus one line for args), but it omits important details. It is not verbose, but the structure is simple; acceptable for a minimal description.

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 an output schema exists but is not referenced, and the parameter is opaque, the description leaves agents without enough information to correctly invoke the tool. Missing pagination, filtering, and output structure 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the 'arguments' parameter. However, it merely restates 'JSON string of arguments' without specifying valid keys, formats, or examples. No added value beyond the schema.

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 this tool lists webhooks, but does not differentiate it from siblings like clio_get_webhook (single webhook) or clio_create_webhook. The verb and resource are specific, but missing explicit distinction.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clio_get_webhook or clio_create_webhook. No context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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