update_webhook

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses that 'The signing secret is not returned' and implies partial updates via 'Pass description=null to clear it,' which indicates clearing behavior. However, it does not mention idempotency, permissions, or other side effects. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a moderate disclosure, not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and key behavioral notes. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or redundancy. Efficient and well-structured.

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 absence of annotations and an output schema, the description is moderately complete. It mentions the non-returned secret and partial update semantics, but it does not clarify that 'id' is effectively required (though not marked required in schema) or specify response format. For a simple update tool, the missing id requirement is a notable gap. Not fully self-sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 40%, with descriptions for 'events' and 'description' only. The tool description adds clarity for 'enabled' (enable/disable) and reiterates description=null behavior, but it does not explain 'id', 'url', or the constraint that 'events' must be non-empty (already in schema as minItems:1). It adds some value beyond the schema but does not fully compensate for the gaps.

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: 'Update a webhook endpoint (partial).' The term 'partial' clarifies it is a PATCH-like operation, distinguishing it from create_webhook and delete_webhook. No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

Provides concrete usage hints: 'Pass enabled to enable/disable' and 'Pass description=null to clear it.' These clarify parameter usage but do not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., create_webhook for new endpoints). The guidance is adequate for a simple update operation, though not exhaustive.

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