remove_dependency

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and return type, without specifying whether the removal is permanent, what happens if the dependency does not exist, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise and well-structured with a clear purpose sentence and Args/Returns sections. No unnecessary words or redundancy, making it easy to scan.

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?

This is a simple 2-parameter tool with an output schema, and the description covers the essential operation and return format. However, it lacks usage context, such as being the inverse of add_dependency, and lacks details about edge cases. It is adequate but not rich.

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 description adds meaning to the schema by explaining 'task_id' as 'ID of the task with the dependency' and 'depends_on_id' as 'ID of the dependency to remove.' However, the latter phrasing is ambiguous—it could be interpreted as a relationship ID rather than a task ID, which creates potential 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 begins with 'Remove a dependency between two tasks,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_dependency, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 tool's use is implied by its purpose, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., add_dependency) or any prerequisites like the dependency must exist. No exclusions or conditional scenarios are mentioned.

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