clickup_webhook_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (array of webhook objects with specified fields) and the action (list). For a read-only list operation, this is sufficient, though it could mention potential pagination or rate limits if applicable.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and scope, second provides sibling tool references and return structure. No fluff, every sentence is essential 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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description compensates by listing return fields. It is complete enough for an agent to understand and invoke correctly, though a note on output format or pagination would enhance completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter (team_id). The description adds value by explaining the parameter can be omitted to use the default workspace from config, going beyond the schema's description.

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 action (list) and resource (webhooks registered on a ClickUp workspace). It specifies what each webhook object contains (id, endpoint, events, etc.), effectively distinguishing it from sibling webhook management tools.

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 mentions sibling tools (clickup_webhook_create/update/delete) for management, guiding when to use this tool vs alternatives. However, it omits explicit 'when not to use' scenarios, though the context is clear.

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