Create Webhook

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read, non-idempotent operation, and the description adds crucial behavioral context: the signing secret is returned only in this response and must be persisted immediately. This is a one-time side-effect an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and the critical secret-persistence warning immediately follows.

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 4-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the combination of complete parameter docs, annotations, and the one-time secret warning gives an agent everything needed to invoke it correctly. The only non-obvious response information, the signing secret, is explicitly covered.

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 description coverage is 100%, so url, events, spaceId, and description are already fully documented. The description's phrase 'one or more events' reflects the events parameter but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, 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 names a specific verb and resource ('Create a webhook endpoint') and adds the key action 'subscribe it to one or more events.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_webhooks, get_webhook, and delete_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 makes the intended use clear: creating a new webhook endpoint and subscribing it to events. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but no alternative creation tool exists among the siblings, so the context is sufficient.

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