delete_webhook

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the permission requirement but omits critical details such as the permanent/irreversible nature of deletion, potential side effects, or expected response. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap.

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, concise sentence in Japanese that front-loads the action and includes the key permission condition. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant information.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description does not explain return values, error handling, or confirm the deletion's permanence. Given the potential consequences of deleting a webhook, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the operation's implications.

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 100% (both webhookId and reason have descriptions). The tool description does not add additional parameter context beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. No need for further elaboration given the schema's completeness.

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 ('Deletes a Discord webhook') and specifies the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by the verb 'delete', contrasting with create, update, execute, and get webhook tools. The permission condition adds clarity without ambiguity.

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 implies the use case: when you need to remove a webhook and have appropriate permissions. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is clear given the tool name and sibling set. The permission prerequisite is a form of contextual guidance.

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