tigergraph__drop_vector_attribute

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the operation creates a schema change job, which is a side effect, but does not mention potential destructiveness, permissions, or impacts on existing data.

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 with no superfluous content. It conveys the core action and mechanism efficiently.

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 operation, the description and schema provide sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly. It does not mention return values or preconditions, but those are not critical for this straightforward DDL-like action.

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?

The input schema covers all 4 parameters with clear descriptions (e.g., 'Name of the vector attribute to drop'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description itself adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action ('Drop a vector attribute from a vertex type') and the mechanism (creates a schema change job to ALTER VERTEX). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_vector_attribute or list_vector_attributes.

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 intended usage is implied by the verb 'drop' and resource 'vector attribute', but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when the attribute should be removed versus when schema updates should be batched).

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