delete_webhook

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses that deletion is permanent and irreversible, and that it requires explicit user confirmation before calling. It could add auth requirements or downstream effects, but the core destructive behavior is transparent.

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 short sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action and irreversibility, the second states the critical precondition. 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?

The description is adequate for a simple destructive one-parameter tool, covering action and confirmation, but it leaves the id parameter's meaning and requiredness to inference. With no annotations or output schema, this is a noticeable gap, though not a fatal one.

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 input schema only has an undocumented 'id' string with 0% description coverage, and the tool description never explains that id is the webhook endpoint identifier or that it is required. The word 'webhook endpoint' gives a weak inference, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete'), names the resource ('webhook endpoint'), and adds 'permanently,' which clearly differentiates it from sibling mutation tools like update_webhook and rotate_webhook_secret. There is no ambiguity about what action the tool performs.

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 explicitly constrains when the tool should be invoked: 'Only call after the user explicitly confirms.' This is clear usage context, although it does not mention alternatives such as listing webhooks or rotating a secret, so it stops short of a 5.

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