delete_relationship

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

The description reveals that it creates a deletion observation, excludes from snapshots/queries, and is immutable/reversible. However, it omits side effects like permission requirements, success/error behavior, or whether the relationship must exist. With no annotations, this is adequate but not thorough.

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. Key information is front-loaded, and each sentence adds critical nuance.

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?

The description covers core behavior and audit aspect. However, it lacks success/error responses, prerequisites (e.g., relationship must exist), and integration with other tools. Given no output schema and moderate complexity, completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail, such as format, constraints, or inter-parameter relationships, meeting the baseline.

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 tool name 'delete_relationship' clearly states the action, and the description adds a specific verb-resource phrase 'Delete a relationship' followed by the nuance of creating a deletion observation. This differentiates it from siblings like 'create_relationship' or 'restore_relationship'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions immutability and reversibility for audit, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to siblings like 'restore_relationship'.

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