supabase_drop_column

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Remove' implies destruction, the description fails to warn about irreversible data loss, the effect on existing constraints/indexes, or the behavior of the 'cascade' parameter.

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 brief (one sentence), but the '[UNIFIED]' tag wastes valuable space without adding semantic value. Given the lack of schema documentation and the tool's destructive nature, it is actually under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 destructive database operation with five parameters and zero schema coverage, the description is dangerously incomplete. It lacks safety warnings, return value description (no output schema exists), and explanation of failure modes or side effects.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. While it implicitly references 'table' and 'column' parameters, it completely omits critical parameters like 'site', 'schema', and especially 'cascade'—a crucial safety parameter for destructive DDL operations.

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 ('Remove') and target resource ('a column from a table'), making the tool's function immediately apparent. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata leakage rather than helpful description text.

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 tool versus alternatives (e.g., renaming vs. dropping), nor does it mention prerequisites such as handling constraints or dependencies before dropping a column.

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