supabase_delete_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose that this is a destructive operation, whether deletions are reversible, or if there are side effects (e.g., immediate revocation of access rules).

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 efficient sentence. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise that slightly detracts from the front-loaded clarity, though it remains brief.

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 the 0% schema coverage, lack of annotations, destructive nature of the operation, and absence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It should explain required parameters, the default value for 'schema', and behavioral implications of removing an RLS policy.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description inadequately compensates. While 'from a table' implies the 'table' parameter and 'RLS policy' implies the 'name' parameter, it provides no context for 'site' or 'schema' parameters, nor explains that 'schema' defaults to 'public'.

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 ('Delete'), the resource type ('RLS policy'), and the scope ('from a table'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like supabase_delete_rows or supabase_delete_user by specifying 'RLS policy'.

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 this tool versus alternatives like supabase_update_policy, or prerequisites such as needing to identify an existing policy. No warnings about consequences of deletion.

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