supabase_functions_serve

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'serve locally' without explaining that it starts a local server, whether it blocks, what port it uses, or dependencies. Behavioral traits are opaque.

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 extremely concise (3 words), but conciseness should not sacrifice necessary information. It is front-loaded but lacks structure; it's a bare statement without elaboration.

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 has 1 optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention how to stop the server, if it's a blocking call, or that it requires Supabase CLI. It leaves many questions unanswered.

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% (the parameter 'function_name' is described as optional). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as it does not hinder but does not enhance.

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 'Serve edge functions locally' clearly states the verb (serve) and resource (edge functions), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like deploy or invoke. However, it could be more specific about scope (e.g., serves a specific function or all).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like invoke_edge_function or deploy_edge_function. The description lacks context about local development workflow or prerequisites.

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