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

The description explicitly says 'delete (id): remove webhook' which is a destructive operation. However, the annotation `destructiveHint: false` contradicts this behavior, indicating the description contradicts the annotation. This is a serious inconsistency, so the score is reduced to 1.

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 compact and well-structured with bullet points for each action, includes a note about the absence of a listing endpoint, and mentions bulk support in a single line. It front-loads the purpose and avoids unnecessary verbosity, earning top marks for conciseness.

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?

The description covers key aspects: return value for create ({id}), the lack of a listing endpoint, the one-per-account constraint, and creation fields. However, it does not explain the 'account' parameter or specify the return behavior for delete. Given there is no output schema, these omissions prevent a full score.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning: it explains that 'data' contains the webhook fields (url, type, doc_token, headers), and that 'id' is the webhook identifier for deletion. It also mentions 'ids' for bulk operations, though it does not clarify the 'account' parameter. This goes beyond the bare schema property names.

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 'Gerenciar webhooks no ZapSign' (manage webhooks) and enumerates the create and delete actions with specific details. It also mentions the lack of a listing endpoint, which distinguishes it from potential listing tools and the sibling create-only tool, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for usage: create requires a URL and optional type, delete uses the id returned from creation, and notes '1 por conta cobre todos os docs' and bulk support via ids. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this tool over the sibling create-only tool, though the combined write/delete scope is implied.

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