Retrieve details of a specific Oura webhook subscription by ID. Use it to inspect subscription configuration using your OURA_CLIENT_ID and OURA_CLIENT_SECRET.
Get details of a specific webhook subscription by ID. Requires OURA_CLIENT_ID and OURA_CLIENT_SECRET environment variables.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The webhook subscription ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses the auth requirement (OURA_CLIENT_ID and OURA_CLIENT_SECRET environment variables), which is real behavioral context beyond the schema, but it says nothing about read-only nature, rate limits, or error behavior for an invalid ID.
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 tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the prerequisite second; nothing is wasted, though it is minimal rather than richly informative.
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 a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (details of one subscription) and the auth prerequisite, leaving only minor gaps such as error handling.
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%, with 'id' fully documented as the webhook subscription ID, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema already states.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get details of') and resource ('a specific webhook subscription by ID'), and the singular 'by ID' scope clearly distinguishes it from the sibling list_webhook_subscriptions.
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?
Usage is implied by the 'by ID' phrasing, which suggests it is for retrieving one known subscription rather than enumerating, but no alternative sibling is named and no when-not condition is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.