delete_webhook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and delivers the critical traits: destructive (HIGH_WRITE), platform-enforced hard block, and confirm=true requirement. This goes beyond the schema, which misleadingly shows confirm defaulting to false. It doesn't state irreversibility or failure behavior, but the essential safety profile is disclosed.

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 with zero waste: the purpose is front-loaded first, followed immediately by the one operational constraint that matters most. Every word 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 2-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, severity, blocking behavior, and the confirmation requirement. The main gaps are explicit wording about what happens when confirm is absent and what a successful response signals, but these are minor for a tool of this complexity.

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%, so the description must compensate — and it does for the most important parameter by clarifying that confirm must be true despite its default of false in the schema. webhook_id is not elaborated, but its meaning is self-evident from the parameter name and tool purpose.

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?

'Delete a webhook' states a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing the operation from sibling tools like create_webhook and list_webhooks. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling for differentiation, but the delete semantics are unambiguous on their own.

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 provides strong invocation context — HIGH_WRITE, hard-blocked, and mandatory confirm=true — which tells the agent how to call it successfully. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance or exclusion conditions; the when is implied by the tool name.

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