Delete Tracker entity link

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: it stresses the operation is irreversible (no undo path) and that the response is merely an acknowledgement rather than a payload.

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?

Three short sentences with zero waste: the destructive action and its irreversibility come first, then the one ambiguous parameter, then the return behavior. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly fills that gap by stating the return is an acknowledgement. All parameters are documented and annotations carry the safety profile, so the definition is essentially complete; only auth/permission expectations are unstated.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description's explanation of `right` ('the id of the entity on the other end') largely restates the schema text. The only real addition is the cross-reference to entities_links_list for discovering the id, which is helpful but marginal.

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 names a specific verb and resource: remove the link between a Tracker entity and another entity. It is clear about scope, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling tracker_links_delete (issue links), which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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?

Usage is only implied: the parenthetical '(see ``entities_links_list``)' tells the agent where to discover a valid `right` id. There is no statement of when this tool is preferred over tracker_links_delete or tracker_entities_links_create, and no preconditions or exclusions are given.

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