Query Supabase Table

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the read-only nature and the allowlist constraint, but omits important details like what happens when a table is not allowlisted, whether results are paginated, and any default limits or error behavior. This leaves an agent uncertain about operational outcomes beyond the simple read action.

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 front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys the core action, resource, and constraint. It is concise, with no redundant or extraneous information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The tool has five parameters, a nested object, and no output schema or annotations. The description provides a basic purpose but is too terse to cover error handling, default behaviors, or how to manage large result sets. The schema covers parameter details, but the overall description leaves some functional gaps.

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 provides descriptions for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'optional equality filters' aligns with the filters parameter but does not add new semantic value beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 reads rows from an allowlisted Supabase table with optional equality filters, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_allowed_tables, which only lists table names, and read_workspace_file, which targets files.

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?

The description implies usage for reading table data but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_allowed_tables or search_memory. The context of reading from an allowlisted Supabase table is clear, but no exclusion criteria or alternative recommendations are given.

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