list_organization_webhooks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'active' webhooks, which is a useful filter, but it does not disclose pagination behavior via the continuation parameter, nor any other side effects or prerequisites. It is adequate for a simple read operation but lacks depth.

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 front-loads the primary action and scope. There is no wasted text, and it is appropriately sized for a straightforward list operation.

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 an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient, but it lacks guidance on pagination (via continuation) and does not differentiate from list_user_webhooks. An agent might not know when to use this over its sibling, and the continuation parameter is left undocumented in prose.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter explanations. The description does not mention the parameters at all; it only implies organization_id via 'organization'. The continuation parameter is entirely unexplained, leaving an agent to guess its purpose and format.

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), the resource (webhooks), and the scope (for an organization). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_user_webhooks and create_organization_webhook by implying organization-level scope, making the 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling webhook tools (e.g., list_user_webhooks). It doesn't mention any conditions, exclusions, or context that would help an agent decide between organization and user webhooks. The context is implied but not explicit.

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