model_add_role

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

The description states 'Add or replace' but does not disclose key behavioral traits such as whether replacement is an overwrite or merge, what happens if the role already exists, or if there are destructive side effects. Without annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 sentence, which is concise but omits crucial details. It is front-loaded with the purpose but lacks structure for param info or usage hints. Every sentence should earn its place, but this one leaves too many gaps.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain row-level-security roles, filter expression syntax, dry run effects, or expected outcomes. The agent lacks necessary context to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the description provides no additional meaning for any of the 5 parameters (projectPath, name, table, filterExpression, dryRun). The agent must rely solely on parameter names, which is insufficient for correct usage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool adds or replaces a row-level-security role and specifies the file path. The verb 'Add or replace' and resource 'role' make the purpose clear, and it distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with columns, measures, etc. However, the term 'simple' is vague and lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions for replacement, or when not to use it. Given sibling tools like model_add_table, the description provides no context for deciding between them.

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