get_mailbox_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only states the action without mentioning whether it is a read operation, required permissions, or any side effects. The description lacks transparency beyond the basic purpose.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Could be slightly more descriptive without being verbose, but it's appropriately concise.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain what details are returned (e.g., webhook URL, events, status). The parameter descriptions are basic. A user would need additional information to use this tool effectively.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters (project_id, webhook_id, mailbox). The description adds only the phrase 'by ID', which is already implied by the parameter 'webhook_id'. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description 'Get details of a specific webhook by ID.' clearly states the action (get details), resource (webhook), and identifier (by ID). Among siblings like list_mailbox_webhooks, register_mailbox_webhook, update_mailbox_webhook, delete_mailbox_webhook, this tool stands out as a single retrieval operation.

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?

Description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as list_mailbox_webhooks (for listing all webhooks) or update_mailbox_webhook (for modifying). No prerequisites or context for invocation.

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