delete_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete' implies a destructive, irreversible operation, but the description doesn't disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to related resources, whether authentication/special permissions are required, or what happens to in-flight webhook deliveries. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 efficient sentence with zero waste. While it could say more about behavioral aspects, it doesn't pad with unnecessary content. However, this borders on under-specification rather than intentional conciseness, holding it back from a 5.

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 is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The one-parameter simplicity helps, but for an irreversible delete operation, the absence of any disclosure about side effects, reversibility, or confirmation behavior leaves the agent with an incomplete picture. Sibling tools like delete_space or delete_goal likely have similar profiles, but this tool alone provides insufficient context.

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% with a single parameter 'webhook_id' whose description is 'The webhook ID'. The description adds nothing about the parameter beyond the schema. The entire tool is simple enough that the schema adequately documents the parameter, but the description provides zero additional semantic value. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting for the one parameter.

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 "Delete a webhook" clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (webhook), which is immediately clear for a simple operation. It distinguishes adequately from siblings like get_webhooks, create_webhook, and update_webhook since the action verb differs, though it doesn't add any behavioral nuance beyond the name.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing to delete a webhook before deleting associated resources), no exclusion criteria, and no mention of cases where deletion might fail or be inappropriate. The description gives no context for selectability.

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