create_database_row

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 indicates creation and return (created page ID/URL), but does not disclose required permissions, integration access, rate limits, or error behavior; the supported-type list is parameter detail rather than behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence, then organized into Args and a Returns line. The property-type list is long but necessary because the schema itself has no descriptions; no fluff, and the structure aids scanning.

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 nested object parameter and 0% schema description coverage, the description supplies the essential parameter details an agent needs to call the tool. It also includes return info that the output schema already covers, but it leaves out usage context and any behavioral prerequisites, which are gaps for a write tool with no annotations.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it describes database_id, the properties dict mapping, a comprehensive list of supported property types with value formats, and the optional markdown content parameter. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 ('Create') and resource ('new row in a Notion database') and adds scope ('full property type support'). It distinguishes itself from read-oriented siblings like query_database and get_database_schema, but does not explicitly differentiate from create_page or update_database_row.

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?

Provides no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance. The agent is left to infer that this is the tool for adding a row when a database write is needed, with no help choosing between it and siblings like create_page or append_markdown.

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