get_webhook_delivery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals the non-obvious auth prerequisite and the limitation that start_login will not grant access. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior or error cases, but the access caveat is the most important behavioral trait here.

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 sentences with no filler: the first states purpose and returned content, the second gives the necessary access action. The structure is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

For a one-parameter getter with no output schema, this is complete: it describes what the tool returns, implies the id's role, and gives the auth setup required. Nothing needed to invoke it successfully is missing.

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 schema already fully documents the single 'id' parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond identifying the target as a delivery attempt.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get details of a single webhook delivery attempt' with concrete contents (request/response payloads, retry history). The 'single' qualifier distinguishes it from list_webhook_deliveries and other webhook sibling tools.

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 access context: requires a Proof account, PROOF_API_KEY, and a server restart before retrying. It also explicitly warns that start_login does not open this tool. It does not name list_webhook_deliveries as the likely precursor, so alternatives are not fully covered.

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