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

Annotations already indicate destructive, idempotent, and open-world behavior, and the description adds crucial scoping: only the webhook is removed, while leads remain intact. 'Read back from LinkedIn' also discloses the external side effect, and there is no contradiction with 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?

Three short sentences front-load the core action and immediately clarify the destructive scope. Every sentence earns its place: the action, the non-destructive effect on leads, and the external synchronization/cost note.

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?

Even without an output schema, the description covers what the call does, what it affects, and where to get the required parameter. The idempotent and open-world hints come from annotations, making this complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the 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?

The schema already documents pageId and adAccountId, and the description adds meaning for the required subscriptionId by tying it directly to list_linkedin_lead_subscriptions. Since 67% of parameters are schema-described, the description meaningfully compensates for the remaining undocumented parameter.

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 opens with the specific verb 'Remove' and the exact resource, 'a lead notification webhook', and anchors the required subscriptionId to its source, list_linkedin_lead_subscriptions. It also explicitly scopes what is not affected ('Leads themselves are unaffected'), which distinguishes it from any lead-deletion or subscription-creation tool.

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 tells the agent where to obtain the subscriptionId and makes the intended use case clear: stop real-time delivery while keeping leads readable. It does not explicitly enumerate exclusions versus every sibling tool, but the context is sufficient for selection.

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