Add property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for a mutating schema-change operation. It does not state required permissions, whether adding a property is reversible, what happens if the name collides with an existing column, or what the call returns. Only the type default is disclosed, which is already in the schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the type vocabulary, then the conditional options format. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should cover side effects and result shape for a write operation, and it does not. It is adequate for choosing arguments but incomplete for predicting consequences of the call.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including the enum and the options sub-object shape; baseline is 3. The description restates the type list and the options format without adding syntax, constraints, or examples beyond the schema, so it adds little marginal meaning.

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 and resource with clarifying parenthetical: "Add a new property (column) to a collection." An agent immediately knows this creates a schema field. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling delete_property or list_properties, but the verb 'add' makes the direction obvious.

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?

Usage is implied by the creation verb and the note that options only apply to SELECT/MULTI_SELECT, which helps the agent pick valid argument combinations. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (does the collection need to exist unlocked?), and no reference to the sibling delete_property as the inverse operation.

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