List Webhook Deliveries

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

Annotations already indicate safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). Description adds key behaviors: newest-first ordering, cursor pagination, 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?

Single sentence efficiently delivers purpose, troubleshooting context, ordering, pagination, and optional filters. No wasted words.

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?

Has output schema and annotations, but parameter documentation is lacking. Pagination is implied but not fully detailed. Adequate for a list tool but could be more thorough.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description must compensate for 7 parameters. Only mentions start_date/end_date; omits webhook_id (required), org_uuid, limit, cursor, output_format. Insufficient detail.

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?

Description clearly states 'list recent delivery attempts for a webhook -- delivery troubleshooting', specifying verb (list), resource (delivery attempts), and context (troubleshooting). Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_webhooks and get_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?

Explicitly labels tool for 'delivery troubleshooting', implying when to use. Mentions ordering and pagination. Lacks explicit comparison to alternatives like test_webhook, but context is strong.

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