create_relations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is a creation operation ('Create multiple new relations'), implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, error handling, or what happens on conflicts. The 'active voice' note is minor and doesn't address core behavioral aspects.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. The 'active voice' note is arguably extraneous but doesn't significantly detract. It's appropriately sized for a tool with a clear primary function.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a mutation tool. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or side effects. For creating multiple relations in a knowledge graph—a potentially complex operation—more context is needed to guide an agent 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 100%, with the single parameter 'relations' and its nested properties well-documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints on 'relationType'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Create multiple new relations') and the target resource ('between entities in the knowledge graph'), which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_entities' or 'delete_relations', though the 'multiple new relations' phrasing hints at its scope.

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 mentions 'relations should be in active voice', which is a stylistic constraint but not a usage guideline. There's no indication of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it relates to siblings like 'create_entities' or 'delete_relations'.

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