replay_webhook_delivery

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state whether replaying creates a new delivery attempt, whether it is destructive or idempotent, what inputs are required, or what the outcome will be. The description provides no behavioral traits beyond the verb itself.

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 extremely short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits essential information about inputs and behavior, making the brevity a liability rather than a strength.

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?

This tool logically requires identifying a specific webhook delivery, but no parameters or context are provided. With no output schema and minimal description, an agent cannot reliably determine how to invoke this tool or what to expect. The description is critically incomplete.

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 input schema has zero defined parameters and additionalProperties true, leaving the agent with no clue what input to provide (e.g., a delivery ID). The description adds no parameter guidance. Although 0 params normally earns a baseline of 4, the open schema creates ambiguity that the description should clarify but does not.

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 'Replay a webhook delivery' uses a specific verb 'replay' and a clear resource 'webhook delivery', distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_webhook_deliveries' and 'test_webhook'. The purpose is immediately understandable even without additional context.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only added context is 'Business plan', which is a plan restriction, not a usage guideline. The implied use case (retrying a failed delivery) is not explicitly stated.

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