list_webhooks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: signing secrets are omitted from the response, which sets expectations about output. The verb 'List' implies a safe, read-only operation. However, it does not mention pagination or error behavior, so it is not fully transparent.

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 is front-loaded with the action. Every word adds value, including the parenthetical about signing secrets. There is no unnecessary detail or repetition of the tool name.

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 operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose and an important output detail (secrets omitted). However, it does not mention potential pagination or authentication requirements, which could be relevant for a complete understanding.

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, giving a baseline of 4. Since there are no parameters to describe, the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The note about signing secrets relates to output, not parameters, which is acceptable given the input schema is empty.

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 clearly states the action ('List') and the resource ('webhook endpoints'), with an important qualifier that signing secrets are omitted. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_webhook and delete_webhook, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does, but does not mention any context, prerequisites, or alternatives such as list_inboxes or list_address_rules. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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