supabase_disable_extension

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. The parenthetical '(drop)' hints at SQL DROP EXTENSION behavior (destructive), but lacks crucial details: irreversibility, permission requirements, dependency handling, or side effects on existing data.

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 with action upfront. Minor deduction for '[UNIFIED]' prefix which is implementation metadata that doesn't aid agent decision-making.

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?

Inadequate for a destructive database operation with 3 undocumented parameters and no output schema. Missing safety-critical context about the cascade parameter's impact and consequences of dropping extensions with dependencies.

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 has 0% description coverage, placing heavy burden on description to explain parameters. Description fails to explain 'site' (which Supabase project?), 'name' (expected format?), or 'cascade' (what dependencies are affected?). Added zero semantic value beyond schema keys.

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?

Clearly states the action (Disable/drop) and resource (PostgreSQL extension). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tool supabase_enable_extension or clarify when to choose one over the other.

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 no guidance on when to use this versus supabase_enable_extension, prerequisites (e.g., extension must exist), or when disabling might fail (e.g., dependent objects exist without cascade).

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