set_webhook

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It discloses that Meet.bot POSTs a JWT-signed JSON payload to the URL on each booking event, but does not detail update behavior (e.g., partial vs full replacement), side effects, or authentication requirements beyond JWT. Adequate but not thorough.

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, each well-structured and front-loaded. The first sentence covers the primary purpose and create/update distinction, the second adds key behavioral detail. No wasted words.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description omits return values (e.g., what the tool returns on success) and does not explain default behaviors for coverage, scope, or is_active. For a moderately complex tool, this leaves gaps for the agent.

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 covers all 7 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds context about create vs update logic and JWT posting, but does not enhance individual parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'Create or update an outbound booking webhook', distinguishing between create (omit id) and update (pass id). Also describes the POST behavior, making it distinct from sibling tools like delete_webhook and list_webhooks.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to omit or include the id parameter, and notes that webhook_url is required when creating. Provides clear guidance for the two main use cases, though does not mention when not to use the tool or alternatives.

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