Greenhouse MCP

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 indicates this is a read operation ('List'), but does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or response format details. The description adds basic context about what is listed but lacks deeper behavioral transparency.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the key information ('List all 27+ Greenhouse webhook event types with descriptions') with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a no-parameter tool and earns its place clearly.

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 the tool has 0 parameters, an output schema exists, and no annotations, the description is reasonably complete for its purpose. It specifies what is listed and the scope ('27+ Greenhouse webhook event types'), though it could benefit from mentioning the output schema's role or additional context like authentication requirements.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter semantics, but this is appropriate given the lack of parameters, warranting a baseline score above minimum viable.

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 specific action ('List all') and resource ('27+ Greenhouse webhook event types with descriptions'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like webhook_list_rules or webhook_list_recent. It precisely communicates what the tool does without being vague or tautological.

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 implies usage for listing webhook event types, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like webhook_list_rules or webhook_setup_guide. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided, leaving usage context partially inferred rather than clearly defined.

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