List webhooks

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that results are not paginated (implying potentially large responses) and by describing the shape of each webhook (URL, event types, status). No contradictions with annotations, though it does not address auth or rate limits.

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 concise: one sentence stating the action and scope, plus one sentence detailing the returned fields. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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, read-only list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it explains what is listed, the lack of pagination, and the data included in each entry. This gives an agent everything needed to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. Per the rubric, the baseline is 4; the description further clarifies what the returned records contain, but this is output semantics rather than parameter semantics.

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 the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('all webhooks of the store') and adds scope ('not paginated'), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like get_webhook (single webhook) or create/update/delete/validate. It also summarizes the content of each webhook, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 clearly indicates that this tool returns the full set of webhooks with no pagination, making it evident when to use it for a complete listing. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., get_webhook for a single webhook) or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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