supabase_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only SELECT, but says nothing about permission requirements, default/maximum row limits, how limit and offset interact, or whether any server-side caps apply. For a data-access tool with zero annotation coverage this is a notable gap.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no redundant filler. It could be marginally tighter or fold in a routing clause, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With six parameters including a free-form nested 'filter' object and no output schema or annotations, the description is only minimally adequate. It does not explain filter operator syntax, whether results are paginated by default, or what is returned, leaving an agent to infer behavior from the schema alone.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description's mention of filtering, ordering, and pagination maps onto the params but adds no syntax, defaults, or format detail beyond what the schema states.

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 a specific verb+resource combination ('Execute a SELECT query on a Supabase table') and enumerates the supported capabilities (filtering, ordering, pagination). It clearly reads as a read-only tool distinct from supabase_update/delete/insert, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the overlapping supabase_execute_sql sibling.

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 on when to prefer this tool over supabase_execute_sql, supabase_rpc, or supabase_list_tables. The implied read-only scope is the only routing signal, and there are no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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