Retrieve A Single Webhook For Project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns a JSON object with full details, providing context beyond annotations. No contradictory or additional behavioral traits are disclosed, but the description aligns well with annotations.

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, with four sentences covering purpose, usage, return format, required parameters, and API reference. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no fluff. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 schema covers parameters and annotations cover safety, the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose and return format. It includes the endpoint for reference. However, it does not mention potential errors or response details beyond 'JSON object', which could be slightly more informative.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides. As a result, it offers no extra value in explaining parameter semantics.

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 the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'a single webhook for project', specifying fetching by identifier. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_project_webhooks_hooks' and 'retrieve_a_single_webhook_for_company' through its focus on a single project webhook and required parameters.

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 advises using this tool to fetch full details of a specific webhook by identifier, implying when to use it (for a single webhook). However, it does not explicitly contrast with list alternatives or state when not to use it, missing an opportunity for clearer guidance.

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