delete_webhook

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses critical traits: it is a legacy immediate write, high risk, and bypasses INFLOW_ENABLE_SAFE_WRITES. It does not state irreversibility or permission requirements, but the risk profile is unusually well surfaced for a delete tool.

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, zero waste, with the critical risk warning and deprecation notice front-loaded before the core purpose. Every element earns its place.

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 one-parameter delete tool with no output schema and rich schema coverage, the description gives all needed context: what it does, why it is risky, and which alternative to use. Nothing an agent needs to decide or call correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (single parameter webhookId with a clear description), so the schema already fully documents the parameter. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a webhook subscription') and explicitly names the preferred sibling tool ('Use remove_webhook instead'), so an agent can distinguish this legacy tool from its replacement without opening either schema.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance by stating 'Use remove_webhook instead' and warns of high risk and safe-write bypass, which functions as a clear 'do not use unless...' condition. No inference required.

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