get-webhook-signing-keys

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 by stating 'returns', but does not explicitly disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. The description provides sufficient context for a basic understanding.

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 concise, with two sentences and a link. It is front-loaded with the core function. The link, while informative, could be considered extra; however, it does not hinder conciseness.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain the return value. It states 'returns the signing keys' but does not specify the structure (e.g., array of key objects). For a simple retrieval tool, this is minimally adequate but leaves some ambiguity about the response format.

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 covers the single parameter 'webhookId' with 100% description coverage. The tool's description merely reiterates that it is identified by webhookId, adding no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'returns the signing keys of a Webhook identified by the webhookId'. This specifies the verb (returns), resource (signing keys), and identifier (webhookId), distinguishing it from other get tools like get-webhook which returns the webhook itself.

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 explains the purpose of signing keys (verifying webhook requests) and provides a link for more details, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. Usage context is implied but not direct.

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