removeLink

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. "Remove" clearly implies a destructive/mutating operation, and the endpoint note adds some semantic context, but the description does not clarify what happens to dependent links, whether removal is idempotent, or whether the operation can be undone.

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 short sentences with no filler, and it starts with the primary action. Every phrase earns its place and the endpoint clarification is kept brief.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description is nearly sufficient, but it lacks usage context, explicit link-to-endpoint mapping, and any behavior about nonexistent links or partial inputs. An agent could call it correctly for a straightforward case but may still mis-specify the input shape.

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%, so the schema already documents that the parameter is an array of device/port endpoints. The description adds the useful notion that each entry identifies an endpoint, but it still leaves ambiguity about whether a cable removal requires one or two endpoint entries.

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 states a clear action ("Remove one or more cables") and identifies the resource as link/cable entries, which is distinct from siblings like addLink and removeDevice. However, it slightly blurs the model by saying each entry is an endpoint of a link without fully specifying how entries group into link removals.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use removeLink versus removeDevice, addLink, or other topology tools. The description simply states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer context from the name and sibling list.

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