delete_task_link

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool removes a link, but does not mention irreversibility, permissions required, success/failure behavior, or side effects. For a deletion action, this is insufficient.

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 efficient sentence with no redundant words. However, it could be slightly expanded to include essential context without becoming verbose.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is inadequate. It omits expected behavior on success, error handling, and any nuances about the removal process. The agent is left with insufficient information for reliable invocation.

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?

The schema description coverage is 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It does not clarify the relationship between 'task_id' and 'links_to' or the semantics of 'custom_task_ids'.

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 'Remove a link between two tasks' uses a specific verb ('Remove') and clearly identifies the resource ('link between two tasks'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'add_task_link' (which adds a link) and 'delete_task_dependency' (which removes a dependency, not a link).

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 such as 'delete_task_dependency' or 'add_task_link'. It lacks context on prerequisites, conditions for removal, or relationship between links and dependencies.

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