Webhook Replay Event

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the primary side effect (re-queuing and immediate relay) but does not mention idempotency, duplicate-delivery risk, behavior for unknown event IDs, or permission requirements.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and outcome. There is no redundant phrasing or unnecessary detail.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves gaps around failure behavior, prerequisites, and what response to expect. It is adequate for basic invocation but not fully self-sufficient.

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 only defines event_id as a string with minLength 1, and the description adds no explicit parameter explanation. The connection between event_id and 'a webhook event' is inferable, but at 0% schema description coverage, the description should have directly identified event_id as the target event's ID.

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 states a specific action ('force a webhook event to be re-queued and relayed immediately') with a clear resource and effect. It distinguishes itself from read-oriented siblings like webhook_get_event and webhook_list_events.

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 intended use is implied by the tool name and the phrase 're-queued and relayed,' but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like webhook_get_event or webhook_status. No exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions are stated.

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