directus_list_relations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable domain context by defining relations as 'foreign keys,' but fails to disclose safety traits (read-only vs mutation), pagination behavior, rate limits, or the structure of returned relation objects.

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 efficient sentence with the core purpose front-loaded. The only structural issue is the '[UNIFIED]' tag at the beginning, which appears to be metadata leakage rather than helpful context for tool selection.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description provides minimum viable context. It adequately explains the filtering capability but lacks completeness regarding return values, pagination, or error conditions that would help an agent handle the response.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining that the collection parameter provides optional filtering. However, it completely omits explanation of the required 'site' parameter, leaving agents to infer its purpose and format (URL, ID, or name) without schema assistance.

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 clearly states the verb (List) and resource (relations), clarifying that 'relations' specifically refers to foreign keys. The phrase 'List all' effectively distinguishes this from the sibling tool 'directus_get_relation' (singular). However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is implementation noise that doesn't help the agent, and it doesn't explicitly name the singular alternative.

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 implies usage guidance through 'optionally filtered by collection,' suggesting when to provide the collection parameter. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use guidance comparing it to 'directus_get_relation' or stating prerequisites like needing a valid site identifier.

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