List every webhook registered in Aidoo to review integration settings and identify active event subscriptions.
Liste alle registrierten Webhooks auf.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "aidoo_list_webhooks"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. While 'list' implies a read-only operation, the description does not explicitly state this, nor does it mention return format, authentication needs, or side effects. It adds no value beyond the basic action.
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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the operation. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool and contains no unnecessary 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?
Given the simplicity of the tool (zero parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description provides a sufficient basic purpose. However, it does not explicitly state the return value or any edge cases, so it is not fully complete, though it is close for such a simple operation.
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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is fully covered. The baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter details. It is clear that no inputs are required.
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 'Liste alle registrierten Webhooks auf' clearly states the action (list) and resource (registered webhooks), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_webhook and delete_webhook. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool name with minimal additional context, so it stops short of a 5.
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 tool versus alternatives. It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or any exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selecting it over similar list tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.