List Webhooks

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond the annotations: 'Secrets are never returned', which tells the agent it cannot harvest signing secrets here (relevant given regenerate_webhook_secret exists). It doesn't cover pagination or ordering, but the added disclosure is meaningful.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the core action front-loaded ahead of the caveat. Nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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 no-argument list tool with no output schema, the description covers the action and one important output constraint. It stops short of describing what a webhook record contains (id, url, events, enabled state) or whether results are paginated, which is the only remaining gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a param-free tool is 4. No param-level gaps exist.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (registered webhooks) with scope ('all'), so the agent immediately knows this is a retrieval of webhook registrations. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the close sibling list_webhook_deliveries, which shares the 'webhook' noun but returns delivery attempts rather than registrations.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description: call this when you need the set of registered webhooks. No when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no explicit pointer to create_webhook/update_webhook/delete_webhook or list_webhook_deliveries as alternatives.

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