supabase_execute_rpc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the PostgREST exposure requirement but omits critical behavioral traits: whether execution is read-only or destructive, authentication requirements, error handling behavior, or return structure.

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?

Two sentences with efficient structure. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise that doesn't add value, but the core description is appropriately sized 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?

Tool has 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no annotations. For a database execution tool with mutation potential, the description is inadequate—missing parameter semantics, safety profile, and output format.

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, so description must compensate. It fails to explain 'site' (project ID? URL?), 'params' format (JSON string? positional?), or 'use_service_role' (permission escalation?). Only implicitly hints at 'function_name'.

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?

States specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('stored procedure or database function') and mechanism ('via RPC'). However, it fails to distinguish from sibling 'supabase_invoke_function' (Edge Functions vs database functions), which could cause selection confusion.

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 one explicit constraint ('Functions must be exposed through PostgREST'), which acts as a prerequisite check. However, lacks when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like 'supabase_execute_sql' or 'supabase_invoke_function'.

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