set_column_display_name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool updates a column's display name and includes the return format and an example, but it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or error behavior. This is adequate for a simple setter but lacks deeper transparency.

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 with sections for purpose, comparison to alternatives, arguments, return value, and an example. Every sentence adds value, and it remains concise without unnecessary fluff.

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 simple setter with three required string parameters and an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter semantics, return format, and an example. It also provides usage guidance relative to a sibling tool, making it complete for the given complexity.

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 no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by providing clear one-line explanations for each argument: 'table_name: Name of the table containing the column,' 'column_name: Name of the column to update,' and 'display_name: Human-readable name to display in the UI.' An example also clarifies the argument order.

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 specific function: 'Set the display name shown in the UI for a column.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool set_display_annotation by framing itself as a convenience tool for setting just the display name, which fulfills the requirement for sibling differentiation.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'This is a convenience tool for setting just the display name. For setting multiple display properties at once (name, markdown_name, etc.), use set_display_annotation with a column_name parameter instead.' This clearly indicates when to use this tool and when to use an alternative.

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