remove_visible_column

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that changes are staged until apply_annotations() and that it returns a JSON with the updated column list. It does not cover error cases or permission requirements, but the key behavior is transparently described.

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 well-structured: purpose, behavioral note, args, returns, and examples. Every sentence adds value, and the examples are clear and relevant. Nothing is redundant.

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?

For a 3-parameter tool with a polymorphic input, the description covers the action, staging behavior, all parameter types, the return format, and provides three usage examples. It is complete enough for an agent to select and 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section thoroughly explains each parameter, especially the polymorphic 'column' parameter with its three accepted forms and examples. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a column from the visible-columns list for a specific context.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like set_visible_columns and remove_visible_foreign_key by narrowing to the visible-columns list.

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 explains this is a convenience tool for removing a column without replacing the entire visible-columns annotation, and notes that changes are staged until apply_annotations() is called. This gives clear context for when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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