Remove Edge

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

The destructive nature is already captured by the destructiveHint annotation. The description adds a small scoping detail by saying 'specific relationship', implying only the targeted edge is deleted, but it does not disclose potential side effects or irreversible consequences beyond what the annotation implies.

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, direct sentence that front-loads the action and object. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 delete-edge operation with complete schema coverage and destructive annotations, the description is largely sufficient. However, it lacks usage context (when to use vs alternatives) and does not mention any return values or side effects, which are not covered elsewhere.

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?

All four parameters are fully documented in the schema with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description provides no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the baseline.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('relationship between two nodes'), clearly identifying what the tool does. It differentiates from siblings like add_edge and remove_node by targeting relationships rather than nodes or bulk operations.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where remove_edge is preferred over related tools like remove_node or add_edge.

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