vk_get_webhooks_7a215dc6e786

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that authentication is required, that a request body is not usually needed, and explains that path/query parameters are top-level fields with camelCase/snake_case aliases. This covers the key operational constraints, though it omits error behavior or exact response format.

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 five sentences but repeats 'Get all possible webhook events' twice. The generic note about alias conventions and body behavior could be trimmed without losing value. Still, it is not overly long and front-loads the main purpose.

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 zero-parameter GET with no output schema, the description provides enough context: purpose, use case, authentication requirement, and body behavior. The agent can confidently invoke it, though a brief note on the return format (e.g., a list of event name strings) would make it fully complete.

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 schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces that no request body is needed and mentions top-level parameter conventions, which, while generic, are consistent with the schema. It doesn't need to do more since there are no actual parameters.

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 'Get all possible webhook events' and identifies it as a proxy to GET /webhooks/events, distinguishing it from other vk_get tools. It also specifies the use case ('when creating or updating a webhook target'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description explains when this tool should be used: to fetch webhook event options for creating or updating a webhook target. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives, but for this simple retrieval there are no close sibling tools, so the context is sufficient.

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