create_webhook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Adds valuable behavioral details: POST method for notifications and HMAC signature verification mechanism. However, lacks operational context like retry behavior, idempotency concerns, or delivery guarantees.

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?

Efficiently structured with clear purpose statement followed by Args block. Every line adds value. No redundant or filler text. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 output schema exists (covering return values), the description adequately covers the 3 parameters and security model. Minor gap: doesn't mention error conditions, webhook lifecycle, or validation behavior that might be expected for a registration operation.

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 0%, but the Args section fully compensates by documenting all 3 parameters with specific semantics: url (HTTPS requirement, POST recipient), events (enumerated valid values), and secret (HMAC purpose). Exceeds baseline expectations for schema-free documentation.

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?

Clear specific verb (Register) + resource (webhook) + purpose (real-time event notifications). Distinguishes from sibling 'delete_webhook' and 'list_webhooks' through the specific action verb.

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?

Provides implied usage context (use when needing real-time notifications) but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_webhooks/delete_webhooks, and doesn't mention prerequisites like URL validation requirements.

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