delete_webhook
Delete a specific Firefly III webhook by ID to stop automated callbacks and clean up your finance automation setup.
Instructions
Delete a webhook.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Delete a specific Firefly III webhook by ID to stop automated callbacks and clean up your finance automation setup.
Delete a webhook.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not mention whether deletion is permanent, requires confirmation, or has side effects (e.g., disabling webhook deliveries). This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.
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 and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.
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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a single undocumented parameter, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the effect of deletion, the required identifier format, or any consequences, leaving critical gaps for an agent to call it 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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'id' parameter beyond its existence. The schema only indicates it is a required string, leaving the agent to guess what identifier is expected (e.g., webhook ID vs. URL). The description adds no semantic value.
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 'Delete a webhook' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like delete_rule or delete_account, though the resource name is explicit enough to avoid confusion.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states the action without context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.