patchWorkItemRelationships

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

The description only says 'Updates,' but with no annotations, it lacks details on behavioral traits such as whether updates replace or append relationships, idempotency, atomicity, or required permissions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

A single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though slightly underspecified.

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 complexity (nested requestBody with oneOf, no output schema), the description fails to explain what 'updating a list' entails (e.g., replaces all relationships or adds to existing). No mention of errors, success conditions, or post-update state. Incomplete for safe usage.

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 schema already explains parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond stating 'list,' which is already captured in the requestBody schema (oneOf object or array). Baseline 3 applied.

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 'Updates a list of Work Item Relationships,' which specifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like postWorkItemRelationships (create) and deleteWorkItemsRelationship (delete), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from patchLinkedWorkItem or patchWorkItem in terms of scope.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., postWorkItemRelationships for creation, patchLinkedWorkItem for single relationship updates). The description does not specify prerequisites or conditions for usage.

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