remove_column

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

The description adds significant behavioral transparency by disclosing the cascade removal to relations, which is not already captured by the destructiveHint annotation. This informs the agent of broader side effects beyond just deleting the column.

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, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the important cascade detail. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 description covers the essential behavior (removal + cascade) and is complemented by destructiveHint and the presence of an output schema. It is mostly complete for a simple removal tool, though it could mention irreversibility, but the annotation already implies destructive nature.

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 input schema has three required parameters (table, column, diagram) with zero description coverage. The tool description does not explain or map these parameters, leaving the agent to rely solely on names. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 action ('Remove a column') and adds the distinctive cascade behavior to relations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like remove_table and remove_relation by specifying the resource type (column) and the cascading side effect.

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 when to use this tool: when removing a column and needing relations cleaned up automatically. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or excluded scenarios, stopping short of a 5.

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