Webhooks Delete

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description usefully adds the required OAuth scope ("scope of the event's entity") and API version, but says nothing about irreversibility or what a successful delete returns.

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?

Four tight lines, action first, then HTTP path, required scope, and API version. Every line carries operational information and nothing is padded.

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 with rich annotations, the essentials (scope, endpoint, version) are present. It is still missing any note on irreversibility or the empty/204-style response, which matters most for a destructive operation.

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?

There is a single parameter whose schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents 'id'. The description adds only the path template {id}, contributing no format, type, or lookup guidance beyond the schema.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ("Delete a webhook") that unambiguously distinguishes this from the webhooks_list/create/update/get siblings. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, but the operation is unmistakable.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'Delete' and the presence of a required ID. There is no statement of when to prefer this over updating or recreating a webhook, nor any caution about verifying the ID before destruction; the only real guidance is the permission prerequisite.

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