add_column

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. The term 'dynamically hints at schema modification, but there is no explanation of side effects (e.g., locking, irreversibility, permission requirements) or return behavior. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and concise, fitting the tool's simplicity. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

Given no annotations, 4 required parameters, and an output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention that the target table must exist, what happens on success/failure, or reference the output schema. Critical context for a schema-altering operation is missing.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning beyond field names. It does not. For example, 'data_type' could be clarified with acceptable values (e.g., 'TEXT', 'INTEGER'). The description only restates the tool's action, providing no parameter-level guidance.

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 'Adds a new column to a table dynamically' clearly specifies the verb (adds) and resource (new column to a table). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_record' (adds a record) and 'run_sql' (generic SQL). The word 'dynamically' adds context, making the purpose very specific.

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 guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., table must exist), nor does it contrast with similar tools like 'run_sql' for schema changes. The description offers no decision support.

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