apex_generate_rest_endpoints

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

With all annotations false (non-readOnly, non-destructive), the description must disclose side effects and prerequisites. It only says 'generate' without explaining whether it creates a new module, overwrites existing endpoints, requires table existence, or has permission implications. The schema parameter for require_auth mentions docs only, but the description itself adds no behavioral transparency.

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 that is front-loaded with the core purpose and lists the HTTP methods. It contains no filler, fluff, or repetition of schema details.

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 tool has a full schema and an output schema, which covers parameter and return information. However, the description omits critical contextual details such as prerequisites (table must exist), side effects (what is created or modified), and how this fits into the broader APEX/ORDS workflow. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all five parameters. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the action (generate), the resource (ORDS REST endpoints), and the scope (for a table), listing the HTTP methods. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apex_generate_crud or apex_generate_ajax_handler.

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 implies usage context (when you need REST endpoints for a table) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It is not misleading, but it lacks explicit guidance.

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