crm_batch_delete_associations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It confirms this is a deletion operation (destructive), but doesn't address critical aspects like permissions needed, whether deletions are permanent/reversible, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, or what happens to associated data. For a batch destructive tool, this is inadequate.

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 extremely concise at just 6 words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and immediately specifies the batch nature. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 batch destructive operation with 3 parameters (2 with enums), 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what associations are, how they're identified, what the object types mean, error scenarios, or return values. The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool safely and effectively.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'multiple associations' which hints at the 'inputs' array parameter, but provides no explanation of what 'associations' are, what 'fromObjectType' and 'toObjectType' represent, or the structure of the 'inputs' objects. The three parameters remain largely unexplained.

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 multiple associations') and scope ('in a single request'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'crm_delete_association' (single vs. batch) or other batch deletion tools like 'crm_batch_delete_objects', leaving room for improvement in sibling distinction.

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. There's no mention of when batch deletion is preferred over single deletion ('crm_delete_association'), what prerequisites might exist, or any limitations. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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