List webhooks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds marginal context ('provider scopes, locks and credits apply') hinting at auth/quota constraints, but it is boilerplate that doesn't specify what those scopes are or how pagination behaves.

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?

Three short fragments, front-loaded with the endpoint, with no wasted prose. 'Read operation' is redundant with readOnlyHint=true, which slightly dilutes the otherwise tight structure.

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 no output schema and no annotations covering return shape, the description should explain what a listing returns and how paging works, but it does neither. Combined with the undocumented 'page' param, an agent cannot call this confidently.

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 coverage is only 50%: the 'account' param has a schema description while 'page' is undocumented. The description contains no parameter guidance at all, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented pagination parameter.

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 restates the HTTP endpoint (GET /v5/webhooks) and labels it a 'Read operation', which confirms the name/title but adds no scope or result detail. It gives a resource but no distinction from the sibling get_webhook (single resource) — the agent must infer 'list' is an enumeration.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like get_webhook, and nothing about pagination or filtering. The agent is told the operation is a read but not when to prefer it over other webhook tools.

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