relay

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses asynchronous behavior ('Returns immediately with a job_id'), retry semantics ('keeps retrying in the background until it succeeds'), and delivery guarantee. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every clause adds value (methods, payload type, delivery guarantee, async return, retry behavior). No wasted words.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description does well to explain expected return behavior (job_id) and asynchronous execution. It does not detail how to check delivery status, but that may be covered by sibling tools. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use correctly.

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% (all 4 properties have descriptions). The description's mention of methods ('POST/PUT/PATCH') and 'JSON payload' correlates with schema fields but does not add significant new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Deliver a webhook (POST/PUT/PATCH a JSON payload to a URL)'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools (which are mostly about time, conversion, extraction, etc.) by focusing on webhook delivery.

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 clear usage context: use this tool to fire webhooks with guaranteed delivery. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but given its unique role among siblings, the context is clear enough to guide an agent.

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