list_webhooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. The action 'list' implies a non-destructive read operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it is read-only, nor does it disclose potential side effects, permissions, or pagination behavior. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly conveys the purpose with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the tool's function.

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?

While the description covers the basic purpose, it lacks details about the return value (list of webhook objects), potential errors, or pagination. For a simple list tool with high schema coverage, it is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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%, and the schema already documents the single optional parameter (team_id) with its fallback behavior. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action ('list') and the resource ('webhooks'), scoped to a workspace. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_webhook, delete_webhook, and update_webhook.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to list webhooks), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. Since there is no get_webhook sibling, it is the only list operation for webhooks, but still lacks explicit usage context.

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