superpos_remove_issue_dependency

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action ('drop') and how to find the id, but does not describe side effects, reversibility, error handling, or required permissions for this mutation.

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, focused sentence with no extraneous words. However, it lacks structured sections like requirements or examples, and could benefit from bullet points for parameter usage.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, but has an output schema, the description does not cover important aspects such as success response, error conditions, or the effect on associated data. It provides only minimal information to use the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameter individually. Dependency_id is referenced indirectly, but hive_id and issue_id are not explained. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema's property names.

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 the verb 'Drop' to clearly indicate removal, specifies the resource ('dependency row'), and explains how to identify it by its id from the dependencies array. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool add_issue_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 tells the agent to look for the dependency id in the dependencies array from superpos_get_issue, providing a clear source for the required parameter. It implicitly defines the use case of removing an existing dependency, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or prerequisites.

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