github_apps_redeliver_webhook_delivery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must shoulder the burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Redeliver', with no mention of side effects, idempotency, permissions, rate limits, or return value. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence with no superfluous words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is overly minimal. It omits important context such as what happens after redelivery, whether the delivery ID must exist, or any error conditions.

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 100% coverage with a single parameter 'delivery_id' described in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the baseline score is 3 given the high 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 clearly states the action 'Redeliver' and the resource 'a delivery for an app webhook', distinguishing it from similar tools for orgs and repos (e.g., github_orgs_redeliver_webhook_delivery). However, it adds little beyond the tool name itself.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_orgs_redeliver_webhook_delivery or github_repos_redeliver_webhook_delivery. The description lacks any contextual cues about prerequisites or decision criteria.

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