linear_rotateManagedOAuthApplicationWebhookSecret

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds that 'The new one-time secret is exposed in the MCP result', conveying its one-time nature and that the secret is returned. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences, each carrying essential information: purpose and key behavioral note. 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?

With an output schema (not shown) likely covering return value, the description adds that the secret is one-time. It doesn't mention prerequisites like ownership or impact on active webhooks, but given the destructive annotation, it is fairly 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 50% (only confirmSecretExposure described). The description clarifies that confirmSecretExposure acknowledges the one-time secret return. For the id parameter, the description implies it is the child app's ID but does not explicitly describe it. Partial compensation for low coverage.

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 verb 'Rotate' and the specific resource 'webhook signing secret of an alpha child app owned by the calling OAuth application'. This distinguishes it from siblings like linear_rotateManagedOAuthApplicationSecret (rotates app secret) and linear_rotateWebhookSecret (likely for non-child webhooks).

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 implies usage context (alpha child app owned by calling OAuth app) but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings like linear_rotateWebhookSecret or linear_rotateManagedOAuthApplicationSecret. No direct 'use this when' guidance is provided.

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