clear_relation_field

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It says what the tool does but not what 'clearing' means (e.g., sets to null, removes the field), side effects, or permission requirements. The field value list is useful parameter information but not behavioral transparency.

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 concise sentence followed by a clear field list. Every word adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the action. No wasted words.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides enough to perform the core action, but it lacks usage guidance and behavioral details. Given the presence of sibling tools and the absence of annotations, more context would be needed for fully informed invocation.

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 compensates for the 0% schema coverage by enumerating allowed values for the 'field' parameter and indicating that 'target_id' refers to a specific person. However, it does not explain the meaning of each field or the format/type of target_id beyond what the schema provides, so it is not fully complete.

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 ('clear a specific field for a specific person') and enumerates the valid field values. The verb 'clear' is specific, and the resource (relation field) is unambiguous. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like update_relation and get_relations by focusing on clearing a single field.

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 the sibling tools (get_relations, update_relation). There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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