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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive. The description adds that results are bounded and scoped to owned subscriptions, which is useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary use case, and no filler. Every sentence adds either usage context or a routing instruction.

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 read-only list tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, boundedness, and a prerequisite routing step. It doesn't enumerate return fields, but 'delivery log summaries' plus the schema is adequate for an agent to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all four optional parameters. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?

Description opens with a specific use case ('whether webhooks delivered, failed, retried, or what payload event logs exist') and names the resource ('delivery log summaries for owned subscriptions'). It clearly identifies this as a read-only listing tool, distinct from subscription management siblings.

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?

Explicitly states the triggering user request and directs the agent to call list-webhook-subscriptions first when a subscription ID is needed. This gives clear when-to-use and a concrete routing rule, though it doesn't contrast with list-webhook-events.

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