fmod_entity_relationships

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states what is returned. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The description should compensate for missing annotations but fails to do so.

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 duplicated (two identical sentences) and includes a redundant suffix. It is not concise; one sentence would suffice.

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, so the description must cover return values, which it does partially. However, it fails to explain the role of the 'value' parameter, and the overall context is incomplete for a tool that likely requires className to be specified.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions, but the tool's description does not mention parameters at all. Moreover, the parameter 'value' with description 'New value to assign. Omit to read the current value.' contradicts the read-only nature implied by the tool name and description. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema and introduces confusion.

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 it returns an array of relationship description objects for the entity. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like fmod_ManagedObject_relationships, and the duplication and suffix slightly reduce clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fmod_add_relationship or fmod_remove_relationship. The description lacks context for usage.

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