List all webhooks.

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description contributes nothing on top of them — no mention of pagination behavior, result ordering, or account scoping introduced by the schema.

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?

One short sentence with zero padding, so nothing is wasted. However, it is too thin to be front-loaded with anything useful — brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision.

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 an open-world list tool with no output schema, the description should at least gesture at return shape or pagination expectations given the page/per_page params. Annotations cover safety, but the agent still lacks any signal about what enumeration yields or how it pairs with get_webhook.

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 page, per_page and account are each documented in the schema with defaults and bounds; baseline 3 applies. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that (for example, why account is a profile label rather than a tenant ID).

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance whatsoever: nothing says when to prefer this over get_webhook, or that it is the collection-level read after create_webhook/update_webhook. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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