unlink_tag

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

The description confirms the destructive nature (removing a link) which aligns with the `destructiveHint: true` annotation. It does not add information beyond the annotation about idempotency (`idempotentHint: true`) or other behavioral traits like side effects or authorization needs.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is direct and front-loaded, quickly conveying the tool's purpose.

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 full schema coverage and relevant annotations (destructive, idempotent), the description adequately covers the operation. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists, and the annotations fill in behavioral context. Minor improvement could be mentioning idempotency or error cases.

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 all three parameters (id, entity_id, entity_type). The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 uses the specific verb 'Remove' and clearly identifies the resource as 'the link between an entity and a tag.' It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'unlink_note_contact' or 'link_tag' by focusing on tag-entity relationships.

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 'link_tag' or other unlink tools. There are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

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