relate

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

The description only mentions the return value (edge id). It does not disclose any side effects, such as whether the link overwrites existing ones, requires specific memory types, or has any constraints. With no annotations, more behavioral context is needed.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and includes the important return value.

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 tool with three well-described parameters and an output schema (not shown but present), the description is adequate but lacks depth on validation, uniqueness, or error conditions. More context would improve usability.

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 clear descriptions for each parameter (from, to, relation). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it creates a typed link between two memories, using specific verb 'Create' and resource 'typed link from one memory to another'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'remember' (store memory) and 'recall' (retrieve), which have different purposes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to link vs. just remember). There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about conflicts with existing links.

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