Delete a specific edge from the knowledge graph using its unique ID. Resolve unwanted connections and maintain an accurate structure by removing edges with precision.
Remove an edge by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| edge_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.13.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as side effects, error conditions, or authorization needs. It simply restates the operation.
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 extremely concise (5 words) and front-loaded with the action. However, the brevity sacrifices needed details, balancing conciseness with adequacy.
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 has an output schema, return value details are not required. However, the description omits any context about edge existence, idempotency guarantees (despite annotation), or post-removal state, making it incomplete for a destructive operation.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the parameter's meaning. The phrase 'by id' hints at edge_id but does not clarify its role or format, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.
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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'an edge by id', making the core action unmistakable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'link', which is a natural counterpart.
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, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios to avoid. Context signals show many sibling tools, but no comparative information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.