create_repo_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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Create', which implies mutation, but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, idempotency, overwrite behavior, or what response to expect. For a write operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no unnecessary words and is appropriately minimal for a tool that is otherwise well-documented by its schema.

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?

This is a mutation tool with 6 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema. The one-sentence description lacks context about behavior, usage scenarios, or outcomes. The rich schema covers parameters but does not compensate for missing behavioral and contextual information.

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 input schema provides descriptions for most parameters (83% coverage), including nested config fields, so the schema already documents the parameters well. The description itself adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score.

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 'Create a webhook for a specific repository' clearly identifies the action (create) and the resource (repository webhook). The qualifier 'specific repository' distinguishes it from sibling org-level webhook tools, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for repository webhooks only, nor does it reference other sibling tools like create_org_webhook for organization-level webhooks. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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