beaconed_webhooks_events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only GET operation ('fetch'), which sufficiently signals no destructive side effects. However, it does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or any behavior around pagination or empty results.

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, front-loaded sentence that combines the HTTP method, endpoint path, and resource scope without any filler. Every element contributes directly to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 adequate for a simple read-only catalog endpoint with two well-documented optional pagination parameters. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it does not describe the response shape or clarify how this tool relates to webhook management siblings, leaving minor but real gaps in context.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema with descriptions for 'page' and 'per_page', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles parameter semantics adequately.

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 states a specific action ('fetch'), a specific resource ('the global catalog of all available webhook event types'), and clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like webhooks_list or webhooks_get, which likely manage webhook subscriptions rather than event type catalogs. The scope is explicit and instantly understandable.

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 gives no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as beaconed_webhooks_list or beaconed_webhooks_get. It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent must infer situational fit from the name and description alone.

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