Remover webhook de recorrências Pix Automático

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating that notifications will be interrupted, which aligns with the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and purpose, then providing usage context. There is no 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?

Given the tool has no parameters, destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations, and an output schema, the description covers what, when, and the consequence completely. No additional information is needed.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics, and it remains clear and sufficient.

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 explicitly states the action (remove) and the specific resource (webhook configuration for automatic Pix recurrences), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like pix_delete_webhook and pix_config_webhook_recurrence_automatic.

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?

It provides clear guidance on when to use the tool ('when the destination should no longer receive these events') and mentions the consequence (notifications stop). It does not explicitly list alternatives, but the context implies deletion is the only removal option for this specific resource.

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