Delete an edge

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states the deletion action and a use case, without disclosing side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or error conditions. The phrase 'retire' hints at consequences but lacks specifics.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two short sentences: one stating the action and one providing use context. There is no fluff or redundant information.

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 simple delete operation with fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose and use case. However, given the absence of annotations and output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral context (e.g., return value, dependencies). It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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?

Both parameters (id and slug) are fully described in the schema with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Removes an edge from the ground' with a specific verb and resource, and adds context about retiring dependencies/flows. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_node or delete_api.

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 a clear context: 'Use to retire dependencies/flows that no longer reflect reality.' However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, stopping short of full guideline coverage.

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