wp_delete_custom_webhook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does convey that this is a destructive action and notes the safe-mode confirmation requirement, but it does not mention irreversibility, permissions, or what happens after deletion.

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, focused sentences: the first states the action and resource, the second provides the critical confirmation condition. No filler or redundant elaboration.

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 low-complexity delete tool with fully described parameters, the description plus schema provides enough information to invoke it correctly. The only minor gap is that it does not explain how an agent can determine whether safe mode is on, but this is not a blocker.

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 already documents both parameters with 100% coverage. The description essentially restates the confirm behavior already present in the schema and adds no new parameter-level meaning.

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 states the action ('Delete') and the specific resource ('custom MCP webhook'), making it clear what the tool does. It is also distinguishable from sibling tools like wp_delete_form_webhook and wp_delete_woocommerce_webhook.

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 clearly scopes the tool to custom MCP webhooks and adds an important operational condition about confirm:true in safe mode. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion cases, so it stops short of a perfect usage-routing score.

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