List recent webhook events

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that events are summaries only, excludes request headers and body, orders results, and states which storage backend is used. It could add more about auth requirements or response envelope, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 compact and information-dense, with the most important facts about ordering and field selection front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place: list content, payload pointer, and storage-mode caveat.

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 list tool with five optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives a solid picture of what the response contains and how to access richer data. It could be more complete by explaining the response envelope or mentioning the api_key requirement in prose, but the schema covers those gaps reasonably well.

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 80%, so most parameters already carry meaningful descriptions. The prose adds context about the returned fields and query intent but does not substantially deepen understanding of individual parameters like limit or source beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific verb and resource, states ordering (most recent first), and enumerates the exact fields returned. It clearly differentiates itself from anyhook_inspect by noting these are summaries only and pointing to inspect for payloads.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to use anyhook_inspect with an id from this tool when full payload details are needed, which is a clear when-to-use alternative. It also explains the account-vs-local mode context, but it does not exhaustively cover all sibling tools such as anyhook_undelivered or anyhook_replay_failed.

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