db_insert

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. It only says 'insert new row(s)' and does not mention return behavior, conflict handling, constraint enforcement, or other side effects. This is incomplete for a mutating operation.

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, concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the level of detail provided, though that level is minimal.

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 tool is a write operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what the tool returns (especially given the 'returning' parameter), how errors are handled, or how this tool relates to db_upsert. The description is not complete enough for an agent to use it confidently.

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 already provides 100% coverage of all three parameters with descriptions for table, data, and returning. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Insert') and the target resource ('new row(s) into a table'). It distinguishes db_insert from sibling operations like db_select, db_update, and db_delete, and even from db_upsert by focusing on plain insertion.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as db_upsert or sql_execute. The description does not mention trade-offs, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool would be preferred, leaving the agent without decision support.

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