supabase_get_database_stats

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It successfully lists the specific data points returned (compensating for the missing output schema), but fails to mention read-only safety, performance implications on large databases, or authentication requirements. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 with information front-loaded, earning high marks for brevity. However, the '[UNIFIED]' tag is cryptic and adds noise without explanation, and the absence of parameter documentation cannot be justified as conciseness—it is an omission.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and zero schema coverage, the description is insufficient. While it enumerates return values, the complete absence of parameter documentation for 'site' and lack of behavioral context (performance, permissions) leaves critical gaps for agent operation.

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?

Critical gap: the schema has 0% description coverage for the required 'site' parameter, and the description fails to compensate by explaining what 'site' refers to (e.g., project ID, URL, or site name) or providing an example. The agent has no guidance on how to populate this required field.

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 tool retrieves database statistics using the specific verb 'Get' and lists concrete metrics (table count, total size, connection info, PostgreSQL version). However,it loses a point for the unexplained '[UNIFIED]' prefix and fails to differentiate from sibling tool 'supabase_get_database_size' which likely overlaps with the 'total size' metric.

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 usage guidance provided. The description does not indicate when to use this comprehensive stats tool versus siblings like 'supabase_get_database_size' (for simple size checks) or 'supabase_list_tables' (for table enumeration), nor does it mention any prerequisites or permission requirements.

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