List webhook endpoints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The only behavioral value the description adds beyond that is the note that results carry delivery health, but it doesn't explain what that field means or whether it is computed versus stored.

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 very short sentences, but the first is a verbatim restatement of the title and the second repeats "webhook endpoints" again. It is front-loaded and non-verbose, yet a meaningful portion of the text is redundant with structured fields.

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-only list endpoint with no output schema and a fully documented input schema, the definition is minimally sufficient to call the tool. It still leaves open what "delivery health" comprises and how results are ordered across cursor pages, which would help an agent use the output 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% and all four parameters are optional, with cursor and created-filter semantics documented inline in the schema. Per the baseline rule, a 3 is appropriate since the description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 ("List webhook endpoints") and adds that results include delivery health, which is meaningful. However, it does nothing to distinguish this from related siblings such as list_endpoint_deliveries or get_webhook_endpoint, so an agent gets the general purpose but not its boundary.

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 get_webhook_endpoint (single endpoint lookup) or list_endpoint_deliveries (per-event delivery attempts), nor any mention of prerequisites or pagination workflow. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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