Skip to main content
Glama

create_knowledge_relationship

Create directional relationships between entities in a knowledge graph to connect and define dependencies, enabling graph traversal and analysis.

Instructions

Create a relationship between two entities in the knowledge graph

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repository_pathYesThe absolute path to the repository where the relationship should be created
from_entity_idYesThe ID of the source entity in the relationship
to_entity_idYesThe ID of the target entity in the relationship
relationship_typeYesThe type of relationship between the entities (e.g., 'depends_on', 'implements', 'extends', 'uses', 'calls', 'contains', 'part_of', 'similar_to', 'related_to', 'conflicts_with', 'replaces', 'references', 'documents', 'tests', 'configures', 'deploys', 'monitors', 'validates', 'triggers', 'handles', 'processes', 'stores', 'retrieves', 'transforms', 'aggregates', 'filters', 'sorts', 'groups', 'joins', 'merges', 'splits', 'compresses', 'encrypts', 'decrypts', 'hashes', 'signs', 'verifies', 'authenticates', 'authorizes', 'logs', 'traces', 'debugs', 'profiles', 'benchmarks', 'optimizes', 'refactors', 'migrates', 'upgrades', 'downgrades', 'patches', 'releases', 'versions', 'branches', 'tags', 'commits', 'merges', 'rebases', 'cherry_picks', 'stashes', 'diffs', 'conflicts', 'resolves', 'other')
strengthNoThe strength of the relationship (0.0 to 1.0, where 1.0 is strongest)
confidenceNoThe confidence in the relationship's accuracy (0.0 to 1.0, where 1.0 is most confident)
contextNoAdditional context or description about the relationship
discovered_byNoThe agent or process that discovered this relationship
propertiesNoAdditional properties and metadata for the relationship as key-value pairs
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the creation action without disclosing behavioral traits like idempotency, side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The schema provides parameter details but no behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, direct sentence: 'Create a relationship between two entities in the knowledge graph'. It is concise and avoids unnecessary words, though it could incorporate more context without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no output schema), the description is too brief. It lacks information about return values, typical usage, or post-creation effects. The schema description helps but does not compensate for missing completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. Each parameter has a clear description in the schema, and the tool description adds 'directional' context, but overall the description does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Create a relationship between two entities in the knowledge graph' clearly states the action (create) and resource (relationship in knowledge graph). The schema description adds further detail, and the tool is easily distinguishable from siblings like find_related_entities.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The schema description implies its use for establishing connections, but there is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons with sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ZachHandley/ZMCPTools'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server