Update a webhook endpoint

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

Annotations already establish that the operation is mutating, non-destructive, and idempotent, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds that `active: false` means paused and mentions resuming, but it does not disclose whether events are replaced or merged, whether URL updates require an active endpoint, or what side effects occur.

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 a single concise sentence with the action front-loaded. It avoids repeating the title or schema details and every phrase adds meaning.

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 tool has four parameters, no output schema, and is a mutating operation. The description plus schema covers the parameter names, but the description does not state update semantics (partial vs full replacement), return behavior, or any required sequence, so it is adequate for selection but not fully self-sufficient.

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 only 50%, so the description needs to compensate. It names the three mutable parameters (url, events, active) and explains the pause/resume semantics of `active`, but it does not clarify URL format requirements or how events are updated; those details remain in the schema or are absent.

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 ('Change') and names the resource ('a webhook endpoint') along with the exact operations: changing URL, changing events, pausing, and resuming. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_webhook, list_webhooks, and delete_webhook.

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?

'Change a webhook endpoint's...' gives clear context that this tool is for modifying an existing endpoint, not creating or deleting one. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of full explicit guidance.

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