directus_schema_apply

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only implies mutation via 'Apply'. It fails to disclose destructive potential, validation behavior, error handling, or whether changes are reversible.

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?

Single sentence is appropriately brief, but the '[UNIFIED]' metadata tag wastes space without adding value. The core message is front-loaded but overly terse given the tool's complexity.

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 schema migration tool with no output schema, no annotations, and undocumented nested object parameters, the description is dangerously incomplete. It lacks critical safety warnings, diff format specifications, and return value information.

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% and the description provides no compensation. The 'site' parameter (string) and 'diff' parameter (object with nested properties) are completely undocumented regarding expected format, valid values, or structure.

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 the core action ('Apply schema diff') and target ('database'), but is minimal and borderline tautological given the tool name 'directus_schema_apply'. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise that doesn't clarify purpose.

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 guidance provided on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., directus_schema_diff), prerequisites for generating the diff, or safety considerations before applying schema changes.

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