postPlanRelationships

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it creates relationships, but does not explain whether it appends or overwrites, supports batch creation (implied by requestBody array), idempotency, or error handling. Critical behavior like duplicate handling is omitted.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it sacrifices informativeness. It is under-specified rather than optimally concise, as it omits key details that would fit in a few more words.

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 required params, nested arrays/enums, no output schema) and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain the purpose of each parameter, the expected behavior (e.g., single vs. batch creation), or what the response indicates. An agent using only the description would have a poor understanding.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no elaboration on parameter meanings beyond the schema. It does not explain the role of relationshipId or the structure of requestBody, despite the schema having nested objects with enums.

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 'Creates the specific Relationships for the Plan', indicating the verb (create) and resource (plan relationships). It distinguishes from sibling tools like deletePlanRelationship or patchPlanRelationships by implying creation. However, it lacks specificity about what 'specific Relationships' means (e.g., between a plan and other resources).

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like postWorkItemRelationships, nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions (e.g., plan must exist). Agents receive no help for appropriate selection.

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