Delete a webhook

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by naming the blast radius ('delivery, audience membership, published data or irreversible state'), the confirm gate, and secret-handling behavior (redaction, local signing secret file) – genuinely useful operational context.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its risk, with no filler. The side-effect warning is slightly terse/list-like but still 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?

With no output schema, the description must carry return/behavior expectations, and it covers destruction scope, confirmation requirement, and secret handling. It omits any explicit statement of what the tool returns, but for a 3-param destructive call the essentials are present.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the confirm=true requirement already documented in the schema and adds nothing about webhook_id or account, so it does not meaningfully extend parameter 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a webhook'), which cleanly separates it from same-family siblings like create_webhook and delete_webhook_endpoint. It does not explicitly contrast itself with delete_webhook_endpoint, leaving the agent to infer the resource distinction.

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?

It gives a hard prerequisite ('Requires confirm=true') and warns of broad side effects, which implies caution before use. However, it never states when to choose this over siblings such as delete_webhook_endpoint, so usage is only partially disambiguated.

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