akb_alter_table

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates that the tool performs DDL operations (schema modification), which implies it is a write operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., data loss on drop column), reversibility, or permissions beyond admin role. Adequate but not thorough.

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, with two sentences that convey the core purpose and a critical requirement (admin role). No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity of altering a table schema (4 parameters, 1 required, nested objects, no output schema), the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like handling of existing data. The admin role requirement is helpful, but more context is needed for safe usage.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by explicitly naming the operations (add, remove, rename) that map to the parameters, but it does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already conveys. No extra constraints or formatting details are given.

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's purpose: 'Modify a table's schema — add, remove, or rename columns via ALTER TABLE DDL.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the operations are explicitly listed, distinguishing it from siblings like akb_create_table or akb_edit.

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 a usage constraint ('Requires admin role'), which is helpful, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., akb_sql for arbitrary schema changes or akb_edit for data changes). The guidance is minimal but not absent.

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