delete_requests

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

The description only states the destructive action ('Delete all or filtered requests') without disclosing irreversibility, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency, but it does not add the necessary caution or context for a deletion 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?

The description is a single sentence with no filler words, and it is front-loaded with the primary action. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured for a tool with a clear purpose.

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?

Despite the schema richness and presence of an output schema, the description is too sparse for a destructive tool with four optional parameters. It does not explain the implications of deleting all requests, the need for token_id, or how filtering works. The description is minimally adequate but leaves important operational context unstated.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all four parameters, each with its own explanation. The description itself adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema already documents the parameters in detail. The description does not repeat or contradict 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 description clearly states the action (delete), the resource (requests), and the scope (from a Webhook.site token). It distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_token (which deletes the token itself) and list_requests (which lists rather than deletes). The verb and object are specific and unambiguous.

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, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description does not mention that the tool deletes all requests if no query is given, or how it relates to delete_token or list_requests. It is a single declarative sentence with no usage context.

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