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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: results are newest-first, include status/attempts/response code/time/error, and importantly do not spend credits. It does not cover pagination behavior or rate limits, but with readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive already declared this is solid added context.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then return contents, then safety. Compact and efficient; the 'without changing records' clause slightly repeats readOnlyHint, but the credits note earns its place.

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 filtered, paginated read-only list with no output schema, the description covers return contents and ordering but omits pagination and filter semantics. Adequate but leaves gaps an agent would need to fill by inspecting the schema.

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 0% for the query object, and the description does not explain the available filters (since, status, event_type, page, per_page). The path id is shown with an example in the schema, but the query parameters remain undocumented and must be inferred.

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?

Clear verb and resource: 'List webhook deliveries' for 'one webhook'. It implicitly contrasts a list with the sibling single-delivery tool, but does not explicitly name or differentiate from siblings like dealmachine_get_webhooks_id_deliveries_delivery_id or dealmachine_get_webhooks_events.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are stated. The only extra sentence addresses safety (no credits/no writes), not when this list should be preferred over fetching a specific delivery or event types.

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