webhook_deliver

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint: true, so the description's statement 'Send a message' aligns. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., potential rate limits, security considerations) beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise sentences: first defines the action and target platforms, second specifies use cases. No redundant words; front-loaded with essential information.

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?

Covers main purpose and usage but lacks details on success/failure behavior, response format, or security notes (e.g., webhook URL sensitivity). Adequate for a simple send action, but could be more informative.

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 100%, and schema descriptions adequately explain each parameter (platform enum, webhook_url, title, message). The description does not add extra meaning beyond summarizing the action.

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?

Clearly states the tool sends messages to specific platforms (Teams, Slack, Discord) via webhook. Use cases for status reports, alerts, and notifications are specified. Distinct from sibling tools like capture_feedback or export_*.

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?

Provides clear use cases ('status reports, alerts, and notifications') but does not indicate when not to use or explicitly compare to alternative tools. No explicit exclusions, but context is sufficient.

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