delete_webhook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a webhook but does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. The brevity leaves significant behavioral aspects unexplained.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key parameter. It is concise and front-loaded with the action verb, with no wasteful words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate, covering what the tool does and the parameter. However, the lack of annotations and behavioral details (e.g., error handling, permanence) leaves gaps that could affect correct invocation.

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 schema describes the 'id' parameter as 'Webhook UUID to delete', which matches the description. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 (webhook), and the identifier (UUID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_webhook, update_webhook, and list_webhooks.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as the webhook needing to exist or potential consequences of deletion. Usage is implied but not explicitly guided.

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