baasix_delete_relationship

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that a relationship is deleted, which implies destructiveness, but it does not disclose whether the operation is permanent, whether it cascades or validates, whether permissions are required, or what happens if the relationship does not exist.

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 short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It simply restates the tool name in sentence form and contains no additional useful information to justify its place.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not explain what a relationship is in this system, what sourceCollection and fieldName refer to semantically, or what consequences deletion has. The schema describes parameter names but cannot compensate for the missing behavioral and operational context.

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 has 100% description coverage because both fieldName and sourceCollection are described. The description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the schema already documents the parameters adequately, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 relationship' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'baasix_delete_relationship' in natural language. It names the target resource but adds no detail about what kind of relationship, what scope it applies to, or what effect it has, so it does not help an agent beyond the name itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as baasix_create_relationship, baasix_update_relationship, or even baasix_delete_item. No conditions, exclusions, or alternative tool references are provided.

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