Rotate Webhook Secret

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only, non-idempotent, and destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: deliveries are signed with the new secret immediately, so the verifier must be updated in the same operation. It stops short of explicitly stating that the old secret is invalidated, keeping it from a 5.

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, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the key operational consequence. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 a simple one-parameter schema, destructive annotations, and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what it returns, and the immediate side effect. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly noting the old secret becomes invalid, but it is otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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% for the single 'id' parameter, and the description adds no additional meaning about the parameter. Per the rubric, high schema coverage yields a baseline of 3 when the description does not compensate with further detail.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Generate a new signing secret for a webhook endpoint and return the endpoint with the new secret.' This is unambiguous and inherently distinct from sibling tools like update_webhook or create_webhook, allowing an agent to identify the action without opening the schema.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It only says to update the verifier after rotation, which is operational advice rather than a condition for selecting this tool over others.

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