delete_relations

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains the input methods but omits side effects, reversibility, permissions, or rate limits—important for a deletion operation.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the purpose. It could be slightly restructured for readability, but contains no superfluous content.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description does not indicate what happens after deletion (e.g., success message, deleted count). It also lacks guidance on choosing among sibling tools, though the tool's specific purpose is clear.

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 100% coverage with individual property descriptions. The description adds value by grouping parameters into the three logical alternatives (by id, by entity IDs, by entity names), clarifying the trade-offs beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb 'Delete relations' and specifies three explicit methods (by relation id, by entity IDs, by entity names), making the tool's purpose obvious and distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_entities or delete_observations.

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 clear guidance on how to specify which relations to delete (by id, entity IDs, or entity names), but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_entities or when not to use it.

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