discord_list_webhooks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so 'Read-only' is partly redundant, but the description adds real signal: the required Manage Webhooks permission and the 'token when visible' caveat warning that tokens may be masked. Missing detail on pagination for large guilds keeps it off a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences with no filler; the operation and its returned fields come first, the parameter constraint second, and the permission/read-only facts last.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the permission and one-of-parameter rules are covered. The one gap is behavior when listing a whole server: no mention of result caps or pagination for very large webhook sets.

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 coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description contributes something the schema does not: although required is empty and the properties are only described as 'mutually exclusive', the description states exactly one of the two must be supplied. That materially sharpens invocation semantics.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List the webhooks') with explicit scope ('single channel or across a whole server') and even enumerates the returned fields. This cleanly separates it from discord_create_webhook, discord_edit_webhook, and discord_delete_webhook in the sibling list.

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?

'Provide exactly one of channel_id or guild_id' gives the agent an unambiguous selection rule between the tool's two modes, and the Manage Webhooks prerequisite is stated. It stops short of naming alternate tools (e.g. when to use channel-scoped vs server-scoped listing), but the context is clear enough to act on.

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