supabase_get_auth_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, the description fails to mention return format, authentication requirements, whether the configuration contains sensitive data, or any rate limiting concerns.

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 with the action front-loaded. However, the '[UNIFIED]' tag at the beginning appears to be implementation metadata leaking into the description field rather than useful descriptive content.

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 single-parameter tool without an output schema, the description fails to explain what the 'site' parameter expects or what the returned configuration object contains. With zero schema coverage and no annotations, the description should at minimum document the parameter and return value structure.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'site' parameter. Given this complete lack of schema documentation, the description must compensate by explaining what 'site' refers to (e.g., project ID, URL, or site name), but it provides no parameter semantics whatsoever.

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 ('Get') and resource ('GoTrue authentication configuration'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'supabase_get_auth_stats' (which gets statistics, not configuration). However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise rather than descriptive content, and it doesn't clarify what 'GoTrue' refers to for agents unfamiliar with Supabase internals.

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_get_auth_stats' or 'supabase_get_service_status'. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation timing.

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