List Webhook Logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' and 'recent delivery attempts' imply a safe read of a recent window, but there is no disclosure of ordering, retention limits, permissions, or rate limits. The pagination behavior is left entirely to 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?

A single tight sentence with the resource and its debugging purpose front-loaded. No filler or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and all three parameters are schema-documented. The description is nearly sufficient for invoking the tool, missing only a note on pagination/recency semantics.

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 webhook_id, cursor, and page_size are already documented in the schema. The description only loosely ties 'a webhook' to webhook_id and adds no format or constraint detail beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (List) and resource (delivery attempts for a webhook), plus the outcome it serves (debug failing deliveries). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_webhooks and get_webhook, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

The clause 'to debug failing deliveries' implies the intended scenario, giving some usage context. However, it never states when not to use it or which sibling to prefer (e.g., get_webhook for config vs. this for delivery history).

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