list_webhook_deliveries

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates safe read behavior. The description adds 'recent' and 'signed' context, providing scope that is not present in annotations. However, it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or what 'results' includes.

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?

The description is a single, succinct phrase with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the core purpose.

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 simple, parameterless read-only list tool, the description is adequate. It mentions 'attempts and results' but does not detail output fields; however, the absence of an output schema makes this a minor gap. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to invoke 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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers the input space. Per instructions, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for 0 parameters; the description adds no parameter-specific meaning.

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 names the resource ('signed-webhook delivery attempts and results') and implies the 'list' action via the tool name. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (which cover categories, orders, products, settings, etc.), though it lacks an explicit verb in the description.

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 usage is implied: to view recent webhook delivery attempts and results. No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, but given the distinct resource and the tool name, the intent is reasonably clear.

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