supabase_get_keys

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 service_role key is never returned and is saved to a file with 0600 permissions for server-side use, which is valuable behavioral context. It does not cover authentication or rate limits, but covers the key safety aspect.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary return value. 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?

Output schema exists, so return format need not be explained. The description covers the main behavior but omits the meaning of the required 'ref' parameter and any usage context, leaving gaps for an agent 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 coverage is 0% for the single required parameter 'ref', and the description does not define it. The file path ~/.appfactory/supabase/<ref>.json hints that ref is a project reference, but this is not explicit.

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 (Get) and resource (project's url + anon key), and clarifies what is not returned. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the resource is distinct enough from siblings like supabase_set_secret.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. It states a security fact about the service_role key but does not say when the agent should call this tool versus supabase_list_projects or supabase_set_secret.

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