list_webhooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' conveys a read-only operation, which is useful, but it does not mention response format, pagination, error behavior, or authentication requirements. It goes slightly beyond the bare minimum but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded with the action, and contains no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states what the tool does and what input is required. A more complete description might explicitly mention the return type (e.g., an array of webhooks), but this is reasonably implied by 'List all webhooks'.

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 coverage is 100% with the single parameter 'teamId' described as 'Team ID to get webhooks for'. The description does not add further parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and resource ('webhooks') with a scope ('for a team'). It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like create_webhook, update_webhook, 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?

The description implies usage: use this tool to retrieve webhooks for a given team. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or provide exclusions. The context is clear but there is no explicit guidance differentiating it from other webhook operations.

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