kaiten_list_incoming_webhooks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does convey the read-only list behavior and explains that incoming webhooks accept external payloads and create cards. It does not mention pagination, required permissions, or response shape, but for a simple list operation 'List all...' provides reasonable baseline transparency.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and scope directly, and the second adds a useful explanatory note about the webhook type.

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 one-parameter read-only listing tool, the description is mostly sufficient: it names the target resource, scope, and required input via the schema. It does not describe the return fields, but the absence of an output schema makes that less critical for an obvious list 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?

The schema already documents the sole required parameter, space_id, as 'Space ID', so description-level documentation is not necessary. The description adds no extra semantics for the parameter, matching the baseline for full schema description coverage.

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') with a precise resource ('incoming (card-creation) webhooks') and a clear scope ('for a Kaiten space'). It also distinguishes this from general webhook tools like kaiten_list_webhooks by narrowing to incoming, card-creating webhooks.

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 scope is clear: the tool lists incoming webhooks for a specific space, and the second sentence clarifies what those webhooks are for. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over alternatives such as kaiten_list_webhooks, so the usage guidance remains implied rather than stated.

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