jsonb_entity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects. 'Analyze' suggests read-only, but 'recommend' is ambiguous: does it only produce recommendations or also create indexes? It does not disclose permissions needed or whether any changes are made.

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, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant information or filler.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should outline what the return value looks like. It says 'recommend GIN indexes' but does not specify the format (e.g., list, DDL, report) or any required database privileges. Given the tool's specialized scope, more detail about the output would improve completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the purpose of the 'schema' and 'database_name' parameters, nor how they affect the analysis. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no detail beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Analyze') and identifies a clear resource and outcome: JSONB columns with @Convert entity attributes, recommending GIN indexes. This differentiates it from sibling tools like jsonb_analysis by focusing on JPA @Convert mapping.

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 implies usage context via 'for @Convert entity attributes' but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like jsonb_analysis or jpa_mapping. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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