Create relation

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

Annotations already signal that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation, so the description does not carry the full burden. It adds the concept of an association definition, but does not disclose what happens if the relation already exists, whether record order matters, or whether both records must exist first.

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 only two sentences, front-loads the core action, and contains no filler. Every sentence earns its place by conveying the operation and the source of the key parameter.

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 non-idempotent mutation with three required parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits guidance on record ordering and duplicate-relation behavior, which are important for correct invocation, even though associationId provenance is helpful.

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 only 25%, with locationId documented but associationId, firstRecordId, and secondRecordId left undefined. The description clarifies that associationId comes from ghl_list_associations, but it does not explain the meaning or order of firstRecordId versus secondRecordId, which is critical when creating a directional relation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it creates a relation between two records using an association definition. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ghl_delete_relation and ghl_get_record_relations, and it even tells the agent where to obtain associationId.

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 instruction 'Get associationId from ghl_list_associations' explicitly directs the agent to the correct source for a required parameter. It does not discuss when not to use the tool, but the intended usage is otherwise clear enough from the description and tool name.

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