set_webhook_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'set or update', with no disclosure of side effects, authorization needs, or whether it overwrites or merges with existing config. The mutation intent is clear but lacks behavioral context.

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, concise sentence. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. While it could slightly expand on purpose without losing conciseness, it is efficient.

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 setter tool with a sibling getter, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain that updating the URL or enabled state will affect webhook triggering, nor does it clarify if the tool can be used to create a new config or only update an existing one. Missing some context for full autonomy.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the two parameters (url and enabled).

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 'set or update webhook configuration', identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool get_webhook_config which is read-only. However, it lacks specific detail on what can be set (URL and enabled state), which is covered in the schema.

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 implies usage for setting or updating webhook config, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_webhook_config for reading. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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