get_webhook_events

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

The annotations already indicate read-only and open-world behavior, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: 500-attempt cap, newest-first ordering, default and maximum range for since, 401 auth behavior, and plan-based payload redaction with payloadRedacted flag. This gives the agent accurate expectations beyond the annotations.

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 dense and front-loaded with the core purpose and return shape. It is slightly redundant in stating the default 24-hour window twice, but every other detail serves a clear purpose, especially given the absence of an output schema.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it states result limit, ordering, timestamps, status code, dead flag, payload behavior, auth requirement, and error conditions. Very little is left for the agent to guess.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how since interacts with the 24-hour default and 30-day maximum, and why old timestamps may still return redacted payloads based on the current plan.

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 specifies the verb and resource clearly: it replays and returns webhook delivery events. It goes beyond a vague label by explaining what is returned — delivery id, subscription id, event type, timestamps, status code, dead state, and payload — making the tool's 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?

It gives an explicit use case: reconcile missed webhook deliveries after an outage, rather than depending on push delivery. However, it does not name a sibling tool as an alternative or state when not to use it, so there is clear context but no formal exclusion.

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