akb_alter_table

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 discloses that the tool uses DDL and requires admin, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., data loss on column drop, blocking behavior, or irreversible changes). This is insufficient for a potentially destructive DDL operation.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes a critical requirement. No wasted words.

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 ALTER TABLE operations with four parameters (including nested objects), no output schema, and no behavioral details beyond admin requirement, the description is too minimal. It omits information about return values, error handling, or implications of modifications.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds a high-level summary ('add, remove, or rename columns') but does not enhance understanding beyond the schema, such as providing examples or format constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it modifies a table's schema through add, remove, or rename operations, using ALTER TABLE DDL. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like akb_create_table (create) and akb_drop_table (drop).

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 notes it requires admin role, which is a key prerequisite, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like dropping and recreating the table. No when-not or alternative naming is provided.

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