Update Mail Webhook

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

With no annotations present, the description must shoulder the burden of transparency, but it merely says 'Update a webhook' without disclosing side effects, permission requirements, or behavior if the webhook doesn't exist. It adds no behavioral context beyond the verb itself.

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 extremely brief, but this is under-specification rather than good conciseness. A single sentence that only restates the tool's purpose provides no useful information and fails to earn its place.

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 tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely inadequate. It gives no context about required fields, effects of the update, or relationship to other webhook operations, leaving the agent without enough information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters (webhook_id, url, event), so schema coverage is 100%, which establishes a baseline of 3. The description itself adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema is sufficient to understand the basic 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?

The description 'Update a webhook' is essentially a tautology of the tool name and title. It doesn't specify that this is for mail webhooks or what specific attributes (URL, event) can be updated, and it doesn't distinguish the update operation from create or delete siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mail_webhooks_create or mail_webhooks_delete. There's no mention of prerequisites, such as first retrieving the webhook_id via a list/get call, or any context for when updating is appropriate.

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