supabase_delete_bucket

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the critical behavioral constraint that the bucket must be empty, but omits other behavioral details like error handling when the bucket isn't empty, whether deletion is permanent, or required permissions.

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 appropriately brief and front-loaded with the core action. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is minor noise, but the two sentences efficiently convey the operation and critical constraint without redundancy.

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 two-parameter deletion operation without output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the main business logic (empty bucket requirement). However, it falls short of completeness due to the complete absence of parameter semantics for 'site' and 'bucket_id'.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, yet the description fails to compensate by explaining what 'site' refers to (project ID? URL?) or the expected format for 'bucket_id'. It mentions neither parameter, leaving both undocumented despite the schema coverage gap.

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 specific action ('Delete') and resource ('storage bucket'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly referencing 'empty_bucket', clarifying the workflow relationship with supabase_empty_bucket.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisites ('Bucket must be empty first') and names the specific alternative tool to use when the precondition isn't met ('use empty_bucket'). This gives the agent clear guidance on when to use this tool versus its sibling.

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