Roo — set webhook

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 does disclose useful behavioral context: most fields are defaulted, and the webhook does not alter the shortlink's redirect destination. However, it does not mention whether setting the webhook replaces an existing one, what permissions are needed, or what confirmation/error behavior to expect.

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 two sentences with no wasted wording. The most actionable information is front-loaded, and the clarifying note about the destination not changing is a valuable second sentence.

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?

The claim that 'you only need to provide the endpoint' conflicts with the input schema, which requires both id and endpoint. This is misleading for an agent and could lead to an invalid call. With 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description leaves too much unsaid about side effects and setup prerequisites despite the rich schema.

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 explains every parameter in detail. The description adds only high-level context about defaults (7 fields defaulted) and endpoint semantics, but does not meaningfully improve per-parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 ('set webhook') and explains exactly what the tool does: fire an HTTP request to an endpoint on every click. The explicit clarification that it does not change the shortlink destination helps distinguish this from redirect-related sibling tools.

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 clearly identifies the trigger context: use this when you want an HTTP request fired on every click. It also provides a when-not signal by stating that the redirect destination is unchanged, which helps an agent avoid misusing it as a redirect-setting tool. However, no explicit alternatives are named.

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