delete_task_relationship

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'delete' but does not mention that deletion is irreversible, whether it affects the tasks themselves, or any side effects on task links or dependencies. This lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about the implications of the operation.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word contributes to the meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple with only two parameters and no output schema, but the description is minimal. It does not explain what constitutes a relationship in ClickUp, how to obtain the relationship_id, or whether deleting a relationship has any cascading effects. While adequate for a basic delete operation, it lacks contextual depth that would help an agent fully understand the operation.

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 coverage is 100%, with both task_id and relationship_id described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but does not enhance understanding of the parameters.

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 'Delete a relationship between two ClickUp tasks' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (relationship between tasks). It is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like add_task_relationship by indicating the opposite action, and from delete_task_dependency by using the generic 'relationship' term rather than '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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like link_tasks, unlink_tasks, and delete_task_dependency exist, but the description does not clarify the distinction or recommend a preferred tool for specific scenarios.

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