learningsuite_update_webhook_subscription

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

With no annotations available, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral consequences. It only says 'Update a webhook subscription' without revealing whether the update is partial or full replacement, whether a valid subscription ID is required, what happens to omitted fields, or any side effects. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 extremely short (single sentence), but this is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. It fails to include actionable details that would make the sentence earn its place, offering only a restatement of the tool's name.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, one required), the lack of annotations, and the absence of an output schema, the description provides no contextual completeness. It does not explain the update behavior, required fields beyond the schema, potential errors, or return values, leaving the agent without essential operational context.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters (url, events, secret, enabled, subscriptionId), so the baseline score is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already documents the fields adequately, so no deduction is warranted.

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 'Update a webhook subscription' is a direct restatement of the tool name (learningsuite_update_webhook_subscription), adding no new information about what the update does, which fields are affected, or how it differs from sibling webhook tools. Since it merely paraphrases the name, it qualifies as a tautology rather than providing a clear, informative purpose.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool instead of the sibling webhook tools (create, get, delete, list, sample data). It lacks any guidance on prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and schema.

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