ue_bp_break_pin

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

The description discloses the primary behavior (disconnecting all connections) and the return value (count), which is beyond what annotations provide (none). However, it does not mention reversibility, permissions, or failure modes, so transparency is partial.

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, focused sentence that states the action and outcome with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

With 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It covers the core action and return count but omits essential context for the parameters, making it incomplete for reliable autonomous use.

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%, and the description only mentions 'pin'. It does not explain the meaning of 'node', 'graph_name', or 'blueprint_path', leaving the agent to infer their purpose. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema details.

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 specific action ('Stacca tutti i collegamenti di un pin') and the result ('riporta quanti erano'), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ue_bp_connect or ue_bp_remove_node.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or compare with sibling tools such as ue_bp_connect, leaving the agent without explicit usage direction.

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