webhook_list_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does declare 'Read-only' and characterizes the output as a static catalogue of event types with descriptions. It stops short of stating auth requirements or whether the list is cached, but for a zero-parameter read-only lookup there is little else to disclose.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then the read-only note, then the sibling relationship. The concrete event-type examples earn their place by making the return content tangible, though the trailing 'etc.' list is slightly more than strictly needed.

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 zero parameters, an output schema covering return values, and the sibling relationship spelled out, an agent has everything needed to select and call this tool correctly.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to compensate for.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (list webhook event types) with the added scope that each entry includes a description. Clearly distinguishable from sibling webhook tools like webhook_list_rules and webhook_list_recent, which list different entities.

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?

Explicitly frames itself as a 'Reference for webhook_create_rule', which tells the agent the condition that selects this tool (discovering valid event types before creating a rule). No explicit when-not guidance, but the context is unambiguous.

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