Create an incoming webhook

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

The description discloses a critical, non-obvious behavior that annotations cannot convey: the secret URL is a credential and is NOT returned by this tool, so the user must retrieve it from the dashboard. It also documents the accepted payload formats (JSON {text} or plain text, no API key). This is exactly the kind of context annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false) leave uncovered.

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 sentences, both load-bearing, with the core behavior front-loaded and the credential caveat following. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 create tool with no output schema, the description anticipates the most likely agent confusion — expecting the returned URL — and explains where it actually comes from. Combined with the annotations covering the mutation profile, nothing essential to calling this correctly is missing.

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 all three parameters (accountId, name, to) are already fully documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description reinforces the notion of a 'fixed' destination but adds no new syntax or format meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb+resource and explains the mechanism precisely: it creates a secret URL that turns inbound POSTs into a WhatsApp message to one fixed destination. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling create_webhook (a separate webhook family), so an agent must infer the incoming-vs-other distinction from the tool name alone.

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 rather than stated: the mechanics of the POST-to-message flow make the use case reasonably clear, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no named alternative among the many webhook siblings (create_webhook, update_incoming_webhook, etc.). No prerequisites beyond the accountId reference are given.

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