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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description still adds value beyond them by disclosing that the delivery log is removed too — a non-obvious cascade — and that a key is required for auth.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the scope of deletion front-loaded and the auth requirement trailing. Every clause carries information.

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 destructive tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers what is deleted and what auth is needed. Missing only the irreversibility/restore story, which matters for a destructiveHint=true operation.

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 single property already documents the format with a concrete example ('wh_01JB2X3Y4Z') and its source tool (list_webhooks). The description adds nothing about the id parameter, which is fine given the schema does the work — baseline 3.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('Remove') plus resource ('account webhook') and extends scope to the delivery log, so the agent knows exactly what is affected. It does not explicitly name sibling operations like update_webhook or rotate_webhook_secret, so differentiation comes from the clearly destructive verb rather than from stated contrast.

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?

'Needs a key.' states a prerequisite but gives no when-to-use context, no warning about irreversibility, and no pointer to alternatives such as update_webhook for reversibly disabling a webhook. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the terminal option.

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