unlink_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. While 'Remove a file link' clearly implies a mutating operation, the description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the link must already exist), side effects, reversibility, or error behavior. Only the return value ('Dict with success status') is mentioned, which is minimal.

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 well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. It is concise, with no unnecessary words, and every sentence/field provides meaningful information. The format aids quick comprehension.

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 simplicity and the presence of a complete parameter description, the description covers the essential operational details. It does not include usage context or edge cases, but these are partially covered in other dimensions. The lack of an output schema is compensated by the stated return type ('Dict with success status'). Overall, it is reasonably complete for a straightforward unlink action.

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 description significantly enhances the schema by explaining each parameter's purpose and constraints. For example, item_id is 'The item to unlink the file from,' file_path is 'Relative path to the file,' and line_start/line_end are described as optional and 'must match to unlink.' This goes far beyond the schema's trivial descriptions like 'item_id parameter.'

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 action: 'Remove a file link from an item.' This is a specific verb (Remove) and resource (file link from an item), and it distinguishes itself from the sibling tool link_file, which would perform the opposite action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used only when a file link exists, nor does it reference the sibling tool link_file or other related tools. Usage context is only implied by the action itself.

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