Get Webhook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns specific fields (endpoint URL, last send date, subscribed events, archive status), which indicates a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm non-mutating behavior or describe error handling for invalid IDs.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no wasted words. It efficiently conveys what the tool does and what it returns.

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 read operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It enumerates the returned fields and clearly indicates the parameter needed, making it sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, as webhook_id is described in the schema. The description adds minimal meaning beyond 'single webhook' but does not provide additional parameter syntax or format details. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema already documents the parameter.

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 tool gets detailed information about a single webhook, using the specific verb 'Get' and identifying the resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_webhooks by specifying 'single webhook'.

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 implies usage for retrieving one specific webhook, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, such as referencing get_webhooks for listing all webhooks.

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