mmar_delete_relationclass

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full load. It discloses that deletion is permanent and cascades to roles, attributes, and ports—key behavioral traits for a destructive operation. It does not cover session prerequisites or error handling, but the most important consequences are clearly stated.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the primary action and the most crucial consequence (permanent deletion and cascade). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema delete tool, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, what it affects, and that the operation is irreversible. Given the simple signature and the explicit cascade behavior, an agent has enough information to select and invoke it correctly.

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 input schema fully describes the only parameter (uuid) with 100% coverage, so the description adds no extra parameter-level detail. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting and the description focuses on overall behavior rather than the parameter itself.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') with a clear resource ('relationclass') and clarifies it is an 'edge type' and acts on a 'metamodel'. The cascade note also distinguishes it from other delete tools by specifying the scope of what gets deleted.

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 name and description make it clear this is for deleting relationclasses, and the permanence warning guides usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the context and sibling tool list make the intended use unambiguous.

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