drizzle_generate_migration

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

With no annotations, the description is solely responsible for disclosing behavior. It fails to mention that this operation generates a file on disk, whether it modifies the database, or if it requires prior configuration. The one-line description leaves the agent with many unknowns.

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 that communicates the core purpose. No redundant wording or filler.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description should compensate by explaining the generation process, output location, and relationship to sibling tools. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer side effects and execution context.

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 complete descriptions for both parameters (name and config) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (generate), the resource (a new migration file), and the mechanism (drizzle-kit). This distinguishes it from siblings like drizzle_run_migrations, which applies migrations, and drizzle_introspect_schema, which reads schema.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention that this tool only creates the migration file and does not apply it, nor does it explain prerequisites like requiring a drizzle config.

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