List webhooks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: a cap of 10 endpoints per app and the security-relevant guarantee that signing secrets are never returned, both of which affect agent behavior.

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, front-loaded with the action and return fields, then the secret/limit caveats. No filler and nothing repeated from the annotations.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the read-only profile, the description fills the remaining gap by describing the returned fields and the 10-item cap. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

This tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline is 4. The sentence spends its words on return shape and limits rather than redundantly describing inputs.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('List the app's webhook endpoints') and enumerates exactly what is returned (id, URL, events, enabled flag), which lets an agent distinguish this from list_webhook_deliveries without opening a schema. It also states a hard scope limit (at most 10 per app).

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 note that secrets are never listed and that add_webhook reveals a secret once gives partial routing for a common follow-up question. However, it never says when to prefer this tool over list_webhook_deliveries or when listing is unnecessary, so the main sibling ambiguity is left to inference.

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