kaiten_update_incoming_webhook

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that an update occurs, but does not disclose whether the update is partial or full, whether it is reversible, what permissions are required, or what side effects may occur on existing webhook configuration.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant filler. It efficiently communicates the core action and resource, earning its place without unnecessary detail.

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 mutating tool with 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how the update behaves, which of the optional fields are actually updatable, or how this differs from updating a regular webhook. The rich schema covers parameter meaning but not usage context.

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 input schema already documents every parameter. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the tool's name and the phrase 'incoming (card-creation) webhook,' which is a minor clarification but not enough to exceed the baseline.

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 ('Update') with a precise resource ('incoming (card-creation) webhook') and scope ('in a Kaiten space'). The parenthetical '(card-creation)' clearly differentiates it from the sibling kaiten_update_webhook and other webhook-related tools.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus related tools like kaiten_create_incoming_webhook, kaiten_list_incoming_webhooks, or kaiten_update_webhook. The context is implied only by the word 'update'; there are no exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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