Rekko MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure, yet it reveals nothing about permissions required, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what constitutes a 'registered' webhook. It only implies a read-only operation through the verb 'List'.

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 at only three words, with no redundant information. While efficient, it borders on underspecification given the lack of annotations and behavioral context, preventing a perfect score.

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 existence of an output schema and zero input parameters, the description meets minimum viable completeness for a simple listing operation. However, it fails to leverage the available description space to clarify scope (e.g., all webhooks vs. user-specific) or safety properties in the absence of annotations.

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 input schema contains zero parameters, which establishes a baseline score of 4 according to the evaluation rubric. There are no parameters requiring semantic elaboration beyond the schema structure.

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 ('List') and resource ('registered webhooks') clearly identifying the tool's function. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like create_webhook or delete_webhook, relying only on implicit verb contrast.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing to list webhooks before deleting them or how it relates to webhook management workflows.

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