Retrieve a webhook endpoint

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context at all — nothing about failure modes for an unknown id, whether secrets are masked in the response, or what the response contains.

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 short, but it is effectively one sentence duplicated: "Retrieve a webhook endpoint" then "Retrieve a webhook endpoint by id (`we_…`)." The repetition wastes the little space available and the id-prefix detail is already in the schema.

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 one-parameter, read-only lookup with rich annotations, this is minimally sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. With no output schema, though, the description could reasonably have said what a webhook endpoint object returns (URL, status, enabled events), and it omits that entirely.

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 coverage is 100% and the single `id` parameter is documented with the same `we_…` prefix format. The description merely restates that format, adding no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ("Retrieve a webhook endpoint") and the lookup key (id `we_…`), so the basic action is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish this from the many sibling retrieval tools, notably list_webhook_endpoints or test_webhook_endpoint, so an agent gets no help telling them apart beyond the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus list_webhook_endpoints (when the id is unknown) or test_webhook_endpoint. The only implicit signal is the id parameter, which the schema already provides.

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