webhook_register

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the optional HMAC secret for signature verification, but it does not disclose side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what response to expect. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool that registers a webhook.

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 front-loads the primary purpose and then lists key inputs. Every clause earns its place, with no redundant or fluffy wording.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a basic understanding but lacks detail on return values, registration persistence, or how to use the secret in practice. It is adequate but leaves gaps that the schema does not fully fill (e.g., what happens after registration).

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond echoing parameter names (URL, event types, secret). It does not explain parameter formats or relationships beyond what the schema already provides.

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's function: 'Register a webhook callback URL to receive event notifications.' It uses a specific verb ('Register') and resource ('webhook callback URL'), and the purpose is explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like webhook_send by focusing on receiving notifications via a registered URL.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: 'to receive event notifications.' It implies use cases like subscribing to events and setting up a callback. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which prevents a 5.

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