Get webhook

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

The annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the specific returned fields (URL, subscribed events, status), which helps the agent understand the response. No contradictory information is present.

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?

One compact sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object, no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 get-by-ID operation with one parameter and a read-only annotation, the description sufficiently covers purpose, input, and the key output fields. Since there is no output schema, mentioning the return fields is especially valuable.

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?

The schema fully documents the single 'id' parameter as a UUID string, and the description only repeats 'by its ID' without adding format or usage details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('a single webhook'), and the identifying parameter ('by its ID'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_webhooks or create_webhook by specifying a single webhook lookup.

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: when you have a webhook ID and need its details. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like list_webhooks for multiple webhooks or validate/update/delete for other operations, so guidance is only implicit, not explicit.

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