Test webhook

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

Annotations are neutral (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that a test delivery will be sent, that the result is returned, and that requests are rate limited upstream. This adds useful operational context beyond the annotations, though it does not describe the exact success or failure response shape.

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 two short sentences. The first states the core action and return behavior; the second adds a meaningful rate-limit warning. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name or 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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, what it returns, and a rate-limit caveat. The webhookId parameter is fully documented in the schema. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the webhookId property already has a clear description ('returned when the webhook was created'). The tool description only references 'the webhook URL' without adding further parameter detail. Given the high schema coverage, the 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Send a test delivery to the webhook URL and return the result.' This clearly distinguishes it from webhook CRUD siblings like mail_createWebhookV1 or mail_getWebhookV1 by focusing on the testing action.

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 implies when to use it: when the user wants to test whether a webhook URL receives deliveries. It also adds a relevant caveat about upstream rate limiting. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling tool performs the same test action, so the usage context is clear without exclusions.

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