Contract Testing: Delete Webhook

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

The annotations already mark this as destructive and idempotent, and the description merely repeats the delete action without adding consequences, irreversibility, or side effects. It adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations provide.

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 core description is a single clear sentence, and the parameter list is appropriately minimal. The 'Toolset: Webhooks' label adds light context, though the parameter block duplicates schema content unnecessarily.

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 destructive operation with no output schema, the description provides enough to invoke the tool correctly. It lacks minor context such as side effects or feedback behavior, but the annotations cover the destructive nature.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents webhookId as the UUID of the webhook. The description repeats this information without adding additional meaning, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a webhook') with the identifier type ('by UUID'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling webhook tools like list_webhooks, get_webhook, create_webhook, and update_webhook.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to choose delete over update or when a webhook should not be deleted. The usage context is only implied by the verb 'Delete', not explicitly stated.

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