gitea_get_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, the description fails to disclose error handling (e.g., what happens if the webhook_id doesn't exist), authentication requirements, or rate limiting.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence. The '[UNIFIED]' tag appears to be metadata noise, but the core description is efficiently structured with the action verb 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 4 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what 'details' are returned, what format they take, or how to construct valid inputs for the coordinate parameters.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining the 4 required parameters (site, owner, repo, webhook_id). The phrase 'specific webhook' only weakly implies that webhook_id is the target identifier without explaining the coordinate system.

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?

States a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('webhook'), and uses 'specific' to distinguish from sibling tool 'gitea_list_webhooks'. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds noise but doesn't obscure the core purpose.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus 'gitea_list_webhooks' (to find available webhooks) or 'gitea_test_webhook' (to trigger a test). Does not mention prerequisites like needing the webhook_id beforehand.

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