create_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. It discloses: Pro+ requirement, SSRF defense, URL must be HTTPS, optional secret behavior, eventTypes behavior (omitted/empty = all events), limit of 10 per account, delivery payload format, and signature header. This is highly transparent.

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 concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose and constraints. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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?

The description is thorough, covering constraints, parameter behaviors, limits, and delivery format. However, with no output schema, it does not explicitly state what the API returns upon success (e.g., webhook ID). This is a minor gap for a creation tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that eventTypes omitted/empty means subscribe to all (though schema also says that) and mentions the account limit of 10, which is not in the schema. It also describes the delivery payload format, which adds context beyond parameters.

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 clearly states the tool registers an outbound event webhook, using the verb 'Register' and specifying 'Pro+ only, POST /v1/webhooks'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_webhook, update_webhook, list_webhooks, test_webhook by focusing solely on creation.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (creating a webhook) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools. However, the context is sufficient for an agent to infer usage.

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