webhooks_get_message

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description adds crucial behavioral context: it states the tool requires NO Authorization header (uses webhook token) and discloses that returned content is wrapped as untrusted and must be treated as data, not instructions. This security-relevant behavior is not visible in annotations or schema.

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 compact (about 60 words), uses clear bolded section labels for Purpose/When to use/Auth/Returns, and each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, use cases, auth requirement, and return format. No redundant phrasing.

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?

For a simple read-only fetch tool, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use it, authentication model, and return contract. The output schema exists but the description still usefully warns about untrusted content, and the annotations cover the safety profile.

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 input schema is fully described (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema provides; the auth note touches on the token's role but doesn't add semantic detail for the parameters themselves.

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+resource construction ('Fetch a message previously sent through a webhook'), which precisely identifies the action and object, distinguishing it from sibling webhook tools like webhooks_get (webhook metadata) and messages_get (regular channel message).

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 'When to use' section enumerates specific scenarios (confirm delivery, audit, edit prep), and the auth note clarifies it uses webhook token rather than bot auth, giving clear context. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with sibling tools like messages_get.

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