edit_relationship

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It lists parameters but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether updates are partial, whether the relationship must exist, what side effects occur, or how branch_name affects the operation. It only says 'change properties' without depth.

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: one sentence stating purpose followed by a parameter list. No unnecessary prose. It could use more structured formatting or grouping, but it's appropriately sized.

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?

Despite having an output schema, this is a complex 11-parameter mutation tool with no annotations. The description only lists parameters and lacks usage context, branch behavior, partial update semantics, and relationship to other CRUD tools. It is insufficient for an agent to invoke confidently.

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 provides a line for each parameter, but most are simple translations of the parameter name (e.g., 'UUID схемы' for schema_uuid). Some add meaning, like 'Новое название связи' (new relationship name) and 'Новое действие при удалении' (new delete action), conveying that these are replacement values. However, there are no examples, allowed values, or constraints beyond the schema defaults.

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 'Изменить свойства связи' (Change relationship properties), which clearly states the action (change) and resource (relationship). It distinguishes from siblings like create_relationship and delete_relationship by the verb, though it doesn't explicitly say 'existing relationship'.

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 doesn't mention that create_relationship is for new relationships or that delete_relationship removes one. There is no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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