Manage Webhooks

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that the tool supports batch CRUD and that certain operations are solo, providing some context beyond annotations. However, it does not fully disclose behavior like what happens on failure or the effects of clear_queue.

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 concise with two sentences plus an example and a reference. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant information, though the example could be more tightly integrated.

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 destructive nature and lack of output schema, the description provides a basic understanding but omits details about optional parameter 'response_format', error handling, and return values. The reference to grist_help for full schema is helpful but does not fully compensate for missing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description includes an example detailing the structure of the 'operations' array, including fields like url, tableId, and eventTypes. This partially compensates for the lack of parameter descriptions. However, 'response_format' is not explained.

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 clearly states the tool is for batch webhook CRUD for real-time notifications, specifying the verb 'manage' and resource 'webhooks'. It also mentions that certain operations must be solo, adding specificity, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like grist_manage_records.

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 provides a constraint that list and clear_queue must be solo operations, but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as grist_query_sql or grist_manage_records. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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