Add Database Column

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

Annotations already indicate non-readonly, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., idempotency of adding same column, authentication needs, or side effects). It aligns with annotations but doesn't expand beyond the basic action.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence clearly states the action and target, while the second lists supported types. Every word earns 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?

While the description covers the core action and type support, it lacks details on return values, error scenarios (e.g., adding a duplicate column), or prerequisites like the existence of the database block. Given no output schema and 7 parameters, more context would improve completeness.

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 descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that 'options' are for select/multi-select types and listing supported types, enhancing understanding of the 'type' and 'options' parameters beyond the schema.

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 action ('Add a column') and the resource ('existing AFFiNE database block'), and lists the supported column types, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'add_database_row' or 'read_database_columns'.

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 description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'add_database_row', 'read_database_columns'). Usage is implied by the focus on adding columns, but no guidance on when not to use or substitutes is provided.

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