List webhook endpoints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description earns credit by disclosing non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: webhook response secrets are redacted and new signing secrets are written only to a private local file — a critical surprise an agent would otherwise miss.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the scope, then the security caveat. Nothing is padded, though the middle sentence ('Reads account data') is close to filler next to the annotations.

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 8-parameter list tool with no output schema and partial schema coverage, the description covers the distinctive secret-handling behavior but omits filtering, pagination, and default behavior (e.g., all_pages/max_items semantics). It is adequate but leaves real gaps for correct invocation.

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?

Eight parameters with only 38% schema description coverage, and the description supplies no parameter meaning at all. Undocumented parameters such as after, before, per_page, and include_total_count receive no explanation in either place, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List webhook endpoints') and adds a useful scope note ('Reads account data'), so an agent knows this is a read operation over webhook endpoint records. It doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling list_webhooks, but the verb+resource pairing is clear.

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 guidance on when to use this versus list_webhooks, get_webhook_endpoint, or list_webhooks, nor any stated prerequisites or conditions. 'Reads account data' describes what the tool touches rather than when to pick it.

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