get_mailbox_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the burden. It indicates a read operation ('get details') but does not mention authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., webhook not found), or rate limits. Basic transparency is present but leaves gaps.

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 short sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any filler. Every word is meaningful and necessary.

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 simple retrieval tool without an output schema, the description covers the core functionality adequately. It could optionally mention return fields or error conditions, but completeness is sufficient given the tool's simplicity and the presence of a sibling list tool for context.

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% and each parameter has a description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents parameter purposes adequately.

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 explicitly states 'Get details of a specific webhook by ID', which is a clear verb+resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_mailbox_webhooks (which lists all) by specifying retrieval by ID.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_mailbox_webhooks for listing). Usage is implied by 'by ID', but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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