webhooks_get_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: no auth/permission requirements, no note that this is a safe read, no info on pagination or what the response contains. The route string conveys zero behavioral context.

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?

It is short, but the parenthetical merely repeats the same route verbatim, so the second half earns no place. Brevity without substance—under-specification rather than true 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?

For a read tool with a rich 4-parameter schema and no output schema, the description should at least summarize the returned webhook resource and its includable relationships. Neither is present, leaving an agent to infer everything from the schema alone.

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%, so the schema already documents id, include, fields_apps, and fields_webhooks. The description adds nothing about parameters, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 is only the HTTP route echoed twice, "GET /v1/webhooks/{id} (GET /v1/webhooks/{id})", which restates the tool name webhooks_get_instance in URL form rather than stating in plain language what is retrieved. It implies a single-resource fetch by id, but adds no scope or distinguishing detail versus siblings like webhooks_deliveries_get_to_many_related or webhooks_update_instance.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as the collection endpoint or related-resource tools. An agent gets nothing to help choose between this and the many adjacent webhook tools.

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