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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real substance: the receiving URL stops getting new entries immediately, and the hash must be sourced from wufoo_add_webhook because Wufoo cannot list webhooks. That is useful operational context beyond the annotation.

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?

Short and front-loaded with the 'WRITE:' marker, then the effect, then the prerequisite, then the raw endpoint. Every clause earns its place; slightly dense but no waste.

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 2-param destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the mutation effect, the hash prerequisite, and the missing-list-endpoint caveat. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is absent.

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 schema fully documents both 'form' and 'hash', including the pattern and provenance. The description reinforces the hash's origin but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema — baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'removes a webhook from a form'. The 'WRITE:' prefix and the deletion semantics distinguish it clearly from the read/list siblings, and it explicitly contrasts with wufoo_add_webhook.

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?

Explains the prerequisite for use — you need the webhook hash from wufoo_add_webhook, and notes there is no list endpoint, which is essential context for selecting this tool. It does not spell out explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is clear.

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