delete_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (delete) but does not mention that deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to related data, or any authorization requirements. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's side effects.

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 (3 words). While brevity is valued, it comes at the cost of missing critical information. It is not verbose but also not adequately informative for the agent. A balanced approach could include a short sentence about effects.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description should at least mention that deletion is irreversible or that the link must exist. It fails to provide any additional context beyond the action, leaving the agent guessing about return values and side effects.

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 the schema already documents both parameters (linkId and brainId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Delete a link' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_link and update_link by explicitly using the verb 'Delete'. However, it lacks additional context that could further clarify the scope, such as whether it deletes all associated data.

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 vs. alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., link must exist), no warnings about irreversibility, and no mention of when to prefer delete_link over other deletion tools like delete_attachment or delete_thought.

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