clickup_webhook_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns an array of webhook objects with specific fields (id, endpoint, events, status, secret, health), which adds useful context. However, it doesn't mention behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or pagination, leaving gaps for a read operation.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by additional details in a second sentence. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without waste, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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's low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, and the return format. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like error handling or performance, which could enhance completeness for a read operation.

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 the schema already documents the single parameter (team_id) with its description. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as default behavior details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation effectively.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('all webhooks registered on a ClickUp workspace'), specifying the scope ('workspace'). It distinguishes from siblings by naming specific management tools (create/update/delete) and mentioning the return format, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

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 explicitly provides when to use this tool ('List all webhooks') and when to use alternatives ('Use clickup_webhook_create/update/delete to manage them'). It also implies context by mentioning the workspace scope and sibling tools, offering clear guidance for selection.

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