associations_delete_relation

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as what gets deleted, side effects, or reversibility. It merely repeats the obvious destructive implication, offering no value beyond the annotations.

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 under-specified at only two words, which is not conciseness but a lack of necessary detail. It does not front-load any useful information and omits critical clarifications about the operation.

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 destructive operation with no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what a relation is, how to find relationId, what happens on deletion (soft vs hard delete), or any cascade effects. An agent cannot confidently call this tool without external knowledge.

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?

With schema description coverage at 50%, the description should compensate for the undocumented relationId parameter, but it does not. It fails to explain what a relationId is, how to obtain it, or the meaning of the 'relation' concept. The description offers no parameter-level context, leaving the agent to work with an incomplete schema.

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 'Delete Relation' is essentially a rephrasing of the tool name without adding any information about what a 'relation' is or what it represents. It does not distinguish it from the sibling tool 'associations_delete_association', leaving the agent uncertain about the difference between a relation and an association.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like associations_delete_association or associations_create_relation. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, so the agent has no basis to select this tool over its siblings.

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