Delete webhook

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and read-only=false, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable 'irreversible' language and the required scope ('webhooks:write'), giving the agent a clearer picture of consequences and permission requirements beyond raw annotations.

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 extremely concise, front-loads the core action, and each element ('DELETE /v2/webhooks/{id}', 'irreversible', 'scope: webhooks:write') earns its place. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple single-parameter destructive operation, the description covers the essential context: the HTTP method, resource path, irreversibility, and required scope. It does not describe response behavior, but for a delete endpoint that is often a simple 204 status, so the description is reasonably complete.

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 0%, and the description does not directly explain the webhook_id parameter meaning beyond the URL path '{id}'. While the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description adds minimal semantic value beyond what the schema already shows.

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 names the exact HTTP verb and resource path ('DELETE /v2/webhooks/{id}'), making the tool's action unmistakable. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_webhook and update_webhook by clearly indicating deletion.

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?

The description implies when to use it: when a webhook must be removed or deleted. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when NOT to use it or alternatives that might be more appropriate, leaving usage to inference rather than direct instruction.

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