delete_relation

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 behavior disclosure. The description only states 'Delete a Relation by ID' and does not reveal whether the deletion is permanent, whether any permissions are required, whether there are cascading effects, or what the response will be. For a mutation tool, this is a significant lack of transparency.

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, short sentence that delivers the essential information with no filler. It is perfectly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal to be contextually complete. It lacks behavioral details such as irreversibility, permission requirements, or side effects. For a delete operation, this is a clear gap that could lead to incorrect use or unexpected consequences.

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 schema has one required integer parameter, 'id', with 0% description coverage. The description's 'by ID' adds only a minimal confirmation that the parameter is the identifier of the relation, which is already implied by the parameter name. It does not explain how to find or validate the ID, nor any constraints, so it fails to compensate for the schema's lack of description.

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: 'Delete a Relation by ID.' It specifies the verb (delete), the resource (Relation), and the identifier (ID), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_relations or create_relation. This is a concise, unambiguous statement of purpose.

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?

While the description does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, the purpose is self-evident from the name and description. Since there is no alternative delete_relation tool among siblings, the context is clear. However, it does not provide explicit exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., the relation must exist), so it stops short of a 5.

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