context_relate

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

The description provides no behavioral traits beyond the generic verb 'create'. With no annotations provided, it fails to disclose whether the relationship is directed, idempotent, or requires existing entries. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool, as the agent cannot anticipate side effects or constraints.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource. No unnecessary words or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a tool with only two self-explanatory parameters.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and the schema covers parameters, but it lacks crucial contextual information: return behavior, directionality of the relationship, and any validation or side effects. With no output schema and no annotations, this is incomplete for an agent to safely invoke the tool in all cases.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters ('Source entry ID' and 'Target entry ID'). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('relationship between two context entries'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like context_add or context_update, which deal with entries themselves. 'For better navigation' adds context without clouding the primary action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for creating relationships, but it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., entries must exist), nor does it contrast with context_add or context_update. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and purpose.

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