directus_delete_relation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. While 'Delete' implies destruction, the description fails to disclose consequences for data integrity (what happens to related items), permissions required, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 brief (one sentence), but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is metadata noise that does not aid agent understanding. The core message is front-loaded but minimal.

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 destructive operation with three undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks essential context about prerequisite checks, side effects, or success indicators.

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 provides no compensatory information. It does not explain that 'collection' and 'field' identify the specific relation to delete, nor what 'site' refers to, leaving all three parameters undocumented.

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 states the core action (delete) and resource (relation), but is essentially a restatement of the tool name with a '[UNIFIED]' metadata tag. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like `directus_create_relation` or clarify what constitutes a 'relation' in the Directus context.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like modifying relations, or warnings about when deletion is unsafe. The description lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information.

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