Create Webhook Subscription

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

Annotations indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint: false) but not destructive. The description adds value by mentioning the returned signing_secret for HMAC verification. However, it lacks details on idempotency or side effects (e.g., whether duplicate subscriptions are prevented).

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, uses two sentences plus a group/cost line and an example. It avoids unnecessary repetition. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate param list), but overall efficient.

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 no output schema, the description only mentions the signing_secret return value, missing other potential response fields (e.g., subscription ID, status). The cost and group info add context, but the tool's output remains incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by listing events and showing an example with both 'event' and 'url'. However, it does not fully describe each parameter (e.g., url constraints like maxLength 2048).

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's purpose: 'Subscribe to outbound webhook deliveries.' It lists events and includes a cost/group note. While it distinguishes itself from sibling webhook tools focused on specific events (e.g., webhooks_dasha_change) by being the subscription creator, it does not explicitly mention this differentiation.

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. There are many webhook-related sibling tools; the description doesn't explain when to use this generic subscription over those specific event tools or vice versa.

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