Look up webhook events

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds that the tool includes registration and verification guidance and covers required privacy webhooks, which is useful context beyond the annotations, but it omits return format or pagination behavior.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the second sentence gives a compact usage instruction. The first sentence is long because of the parenthetical event-family list, but that list earns its place by scoping what the tool covers.

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 read-only lookup with one fully described optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers what is listed, how to narrow it, and when to use it. It does not describe the response shape or pagination, which is a minor gap for this tool.

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 100%, and the single optional query parameter is fully documented with examples like 'order/paid', 'fulfillment_order', and empty for the full list. The description adds no query syntax or selection detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List the webhook events of Tiendanube / Nuvemshop' and enumerates the event families covered. It is distinguishable from sibling documentation and scaffold tools by its webhook-event lookup focus, although it does not explicitly name a sibling.

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?

It gives a clear timing instruction: 'Use it before registering webhooks or writing a receiver.' It lacks when-not guidance and does not point to alternatives such as search-docs or read-doc, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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