monobank-unset-webhook

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds the valuable context that 'Monobank will stop sending push notifications', which clarifies the real-world consequence of the destructive action. It also reinforces idempotency with the 'safe to call' note, going beyond just the annotation flags.

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 two sentences, with the primary action front-loaded. Each sentence adds necessary information: the action and the consequence, plus an idempotency note. There is no waste or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what it does, the effect (stops push notifications), and the safety idempotency behavior. No additional context is needed for an agent to invoke this correctly.

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 is empty (zero parameters), so schema coverage is 100%. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The description's focus on the token scope ('for this Monobank token') is sufficient given there are no explicit parameters.

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 tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Removes the webhook URL for this Monobank token.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like monobank-get-webhook and monobank-set-webhook, as it explicitly indicates the removal action.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: to stop push notifications by removing the webhook. It also notes that it is 'Safe to call even if no webhook is currently set', giving guidance on idempotent usage. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, hence the 4 rather than 5.

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