create_relations

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

The description discloses that it creates relations, returns IDs, and allows updates via override. However, it omits details on error handling (e.g., missing endpoints), side effects, or permissions. With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides only partial coverage.

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?

Three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Concise and efficient, though could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for clarity).

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 no output schema, the description mentions return value (IDs) and override behavior. However, it lacks context on error scenarios, default category, or contrast with sibling tools like 'delete_relations'. Adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 67%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining endpoint specification (id or name/type) and override behavior, but much of this repeats schema info. It does not compensate for the missing description on the 'relations' parameter.

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 tool creates multiple relations between entities and specifies how endpoints are identified. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'create_entities' or 'delete_relations', leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions an override option but does not discuss exclusions or prerequisites, such as needing entities to exist first.

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