create_relation

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

The description repeats the idempotent hint from annotations and adds behavioral details such as enforcement of association endpoint classes, direction, duplicate handling, automation-only restrictions, and cardinality. No contradiction with annotations. Could be more explicit about side effects beyond creation.

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 two sentences, each packing essential information without redundancy or fluff. It front-loads the core action and lists constraints efficiently.

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 presence of an output schema (not provided), the description covers the purpose and constraints adequately. It explains idempotency, endpoint types, and enforcement rules, but could elaborate on success/error returns or automation-only restrictions more explicitly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description mentions endpoint locator types and direction/ifExists handling, but these are already described in the schema. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema.

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 'create' and the resource 'concrete relation between two resolved documents for a writable association'. It specifies that endpoint locators support raw, issue, document, and card, distinguishing this relation creation from other relation tools like add_issue_relation.

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 indicates it is for creating relations idempotently and mentions enforcement of constraints. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives (e.g., add_issue_relation, delete_relation). The context is clear but lacks direct exclusionary guidance.

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