Delete webhook

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mutation nature is covered. The description adds the 'Requires admin access' permission context, which adds value beyond annotations. No contradiction detected. However, it doesn't disclose what happens to the webhook's associated behavior (e.g., no further events sent, idempotency behavior).

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 short sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action verb. Could arguably be more concise but the current length is appropriate for a deleting operation.

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?

With destructiveHint annotation and a clear purpose, this is largely sufficient for a simple resource deletion. However, the idempotency_key parameter is completely unexplained, there's no mention of what happens post-deletion, and the admin access requirement is the only behavioral context. Adequate but with gaps for a destructive operation.

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 67%: project_id and webhook_id are well-described in the schema ('list_projects returns valid project ids'), but idempotency_key is undocumented in both schema and description. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given moderate schema coverage.

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 'Delete a webhook endpoint' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create_webhook and update_webhook. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other destructive operations beyond the verb-resource combination.

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 includes 'Requires admin access' which hints at a precondition, but provides no guidance on when to use this vs alternatives, no consequences of deletion, and no context about irreversible effects relative to other webhook operations. There's no when-not-to-use guidance.

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