create_webhook

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, and non-idempotent behavior. The description adds context about the return of a signing secret for payload verification, which is relevant behavioral info. No contradictions detected.

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 two short sentences, fully front-loaded with the action and purpose. Every word serves a purpose: creating the webhook, receiving events, and returning a signing secret. No unnecessary detail.

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 simple structure (2 params, no nested objects, no output schema) and annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and return value. It could mention that the webhook sends POSTs for selected events, but overall it's sufficiently complete for an AI agent to understand usage.

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 fully describes both parameters (endpoint and events) with their types and descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific information, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create', the resource 'webhook endpoint', and its purpose 'receives Resend events'. It also mentions the unique return value of a signing secret, distinguishing it from other create tools like create_domain or create_api_key.

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 implies the tool is used when setting up event notifications, but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites (e.g., requirement for a verified domain) or when alternatives like other webhook tools (update_webhook, delete_webhook) should be used. No 'when not to use' is provided.

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