list_webhooks

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 implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state that it causes no side effects, nor does it mention response format, pagination, or rate limits. For a simple list operation, this is acceptable but leaves some behavioral details unspecified.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler or unnecessary detail.

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 that the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description provides a clear picture of what the operation does. It does not detail the exact return structure, but for a list operation the expected outcome (a list of endpoints) is sufficiently implied. The overall context is complete enough for an agent to invoke the 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 has zero parameters, and the description is consistent with that (no parameter details omitted). Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4 because there is no additional parameter semantics to add beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('webhook callback endpoints') scoped to 'the account'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_webhook and remove_webhook by indicating it is the read-only listing operation.

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 purpose is self-evident: use this when you need to see all registered webhooks. It does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but the clear scope and the presence of add_webhook/remove_webhook make the usage context unambiguous. There is no need to mention alternatives for a simple listing tool.

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