remove_task_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'remove a link' without noting whether this is reversible, whether it affects notifications, whether permissions are required, or whether linked tasks get affected. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action verb and resource. Zero waste. While sparse, it earns its length for a straightforward 2-parameter operation.

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?

For a simple 2-param, no-output-schema mutation tool, this is mostly adequate but could add context about the link relationship semantics and whether this is a hard/soft delete. The presence of both add_task_link and delete_task_dependency as siblings suggests link types exist that aren't clarified here. Minimal but sufficient for the simplest reading.

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 coverage is 100%, and both parameters have descriptions (task_id as Source task ID, links_to as Target task ID to unlink). The description and schema together convey the directional nature of removal, so the baseline 3 is elevated because the parameter naming plus descriptions clarify which is source vs target. Not much more needed for a 2-param tool.

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 'Remove a link between two tasks' has a specific verb (remove) plus resource (task link) and clearly states the action. It distinguishes itself from sibling add_task_link by the verb. However, it doesn't elaborate on what kind of link (dependency vs. generic), and doesn't explicitly differentiate from remove_tag_from_task or delete_task_dependency.

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 states what occurs (removing a link between two tasks) but provides no guidance on when to use it versus the sibling delete_task_dependency or add_task_link. No use cases, no exclusions, and no alternatives are named. Context is clear but there's no differentiation guidance.

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