tickerbot_create_webhook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP endpoint, the required trigger object, and trigger shapes, but it does not mention what side effects occur (e.g., webhook creation, idempotency, required authentication, or response format). This is a gap for a mutation tool.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and tightly structured: endpoint, usage guidance, and trigger shapes. Every sentence carries essential information with no fluff.

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?

The input side is well covered: 8 parameters with 100% schema coverage, trigger shapes detailed, and channel inference noted. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention return values, error behavior, or prerequisites (e.g., authentication), leaving the context incomplete for a create operation.

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 the baseline is 3. The description exceeds this by detailing the exact trigger shapes for each type (e.g., scan {type:'scan', q, universe?}), which the schema's trigger property only vaguely references by saying 'see the tool description'. This adds meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 tool is 'the canonical webhook create — POST /v2/webhooks with an explicit trigger object' and enumerates the four trigger types (scan, ticker, signal, event). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the 'subscribe tools above' as flat sugar, making the purpose and scope 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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: 'use this form when composing the trigger programmatically or when a sugar door doesn't fit.' It also names the alternative subscribe tools, giving clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use context.

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