List automation webhooks

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description adds meaningful context: it filters to non-archived automations and specifies the exact return content (trigger URLs and accepted parameters). This goes beyond annotation already provided, though it doesn't discuss pagination or response format in detail.

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-loads the core purpose, and includes the endpoint as a practical reference. No wasted words or redundant repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating what is returned (trigger URLs and accepted parameters) and the scope (non-archived automations). The endpoint provides additional context. Given the moderate complexity of a list operation with pagination, the description is sufficiently complete, though it could mention that all webhooks are returned regardless of automations.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the description does not need to explain them. The description adds no parameter-level information, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage. The endpoint also implies pagination behavior, which is already documented in parameters.

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 lists automation webhooks, distinguishing it from sibling tools like listAutomations and triggerWebhook. It also specifies what is returned (trigger URLs and accepted parameters) and includes the endpoint, providing a specific verb+resource pair.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to list webhook trigger URLs and accepted parameters for non-archived automations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling context (listAutomations, triggerWebhook) makes the scope evident. The endpoint further anchors the usage.

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