list_webhooks

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses cursor-based pagination, which is useful, but does not explicitly state it is a read-only operation or describe the response shape (no output schema exists to fill this gap). For a list tool with zero annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then appends the key pagination trait. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 list tool with no required parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description captures the essential behavior. The only minor gap is the unstated read-only nature and absence of any return-format hint, but given there is no output schema and the operation is trivially safe, this is a minor omission.

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%, with both cursor and page_size fully documented in the schema itself. The description's 'cursor-paginated' phrasing slightly reinforces the cursor parameter's role, but adds no material 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('registered webhook endpoints'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_webhook (single fetch), create/update/delete_webhook (mutations), and list_webhook_deliveries (deliveries, not endpoints). The cursor-pagination trait further narrows its identity.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Usage is only implied by the 'List' verb; the agent must infer this is the enumeration counterpart to create/update/delete/get_webhook. No mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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