Update webhook

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

Beyond the annotation readOnlyHint=false, the description discloses a non-obvious behavioral rule ('Empty description deletes it') and the required OAuth scope (webhooks:write). It does not explain full vs. partial update semantics, but the added caveat is valuable.

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 compact: a method+path fragment, a scope note, and a critical behavioral warning. Every piece earns its place, and the key caveat is called out without obscuring the 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?

With six parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no output schema, an agent lacks enough context to correctly craft the request body or understand how to specify webhook_id. The description only highlights the empty-description deletion case, leaving most invocation details uncovered.

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%, yet the description only explains behavior for the description parameter ('Empty description deletes it') and leaves status, endpoint, passcode, and event_type undocumented. It adds a little value over the schema but fails to compensate for the missing parameter explanations.

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 identifies the action with 'PUT /v2/webhooks/{id}' and the title 'Update webhook', which distinguishes it from create/delete/get/list siblings. However, it does not enumerate what aspects of the webhook can be updated, so it stops short of a 5.

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 is given about when to use this tool instead of create_webhook, delete_webhook, or get_webhook. The scope and the 'Empty description deletes it' rule are constraints, not usage directions, so an agent must infer that this tool targets an existing webhook.

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