update_webhook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that only certain fields are updateable and subscriptions are fixed. Could add more about return value or error conditions, but overall transparent about limitations.

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 concise sentences that front-load the updateable fields and then state the critical limitation. No wasted words; effective and efficient.

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?

Covers essential usage for a simple update tool, including constraints. Missing return value information, but given no output schema and the tool's straightforward nature, it is sufficiently 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds some context (e.g., 'Provide at least one field' and note about headers), but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 the verb (update) and the resource (webhook), listing specific fields that can be updated (endpoint URL, description, custom headers). Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_webhook and delete_webhook.

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 what the tool does and does not do: it does not change attached agents/events, and advises to delete and recreate the webhook for attachment changes. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with an alternative.

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