List Webhook Deliveries

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details: results are newest-first and cursor-paginated, with optional date filters. No contradictions.

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 with clear front-loading of purpose and concise addition of ordering, pagination, and optional filters. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and the description covers only main purpose and two parameters, it is partially complete. It mentions returned fields (status, latency, error) but omits many parameters and does not describe return format. Acceptable but not comprehensive.

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%, so the description bears the burden of explaining parameter semantics. It only mentions webhook_id implicitly (via 'for a webhook') and startDate/endDate filters explicitly, but ignores org_uuid, limit, cursor, and output_format. This leaves 4 of 7 parameters undocumented.

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 clearly states it lists recent delivery attempts for a webhook, including specific fields (status, latency, error) and its use for troubleshooting. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_webhooks (which lists webhooks themselves) and test_webhook (which tests a 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?

The description explicitly ties the tool to 'delivery troubleshooting', indicating it should be used to investigate delivery issues. While it doesn't list alternatives or when not to use, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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