insert_rows

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

Annotations indicate `readOnlyHint: false` and `destructiveHint: false`, meaning the tool mutates but is not destructive. The description clearly states 'insert' which implies mutation, aligning with annotations. It also explains that rows are a parameterized object array and schema defaults to public, adding context beyond annotations.

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 one sentence, but it's dense and front-loaded with the action and key details. It's slightly unclear due to the '参数化批量插入' phrasing, which could be more explicit. However, it is concise and contains necessary info for mutation.

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?

Given there's no output schema, the description need not cover return values. It covers the main inputs and behavior. However, it lacks detail on error handling or constraints (e.g., row structure consistency noted in schema but not described). It's mostly complete for a mutation tool with helpful schema and annotations.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by defining rows as an object array with keys as column names, and clarifies the default schema behavior. The schema alone lacks the semantic of mapping row objects to table columns, which the description provides.

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 specifies a clear verb ('insert') and resource ('rows'), and mentions the key parameter `rows` with column semantics. It distinguishes from siblings like `update_rows` and `delete_rows` by the action verb, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 when inserting rows, but doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like `update_rows` or `execute`. No when-not-to-use conditions or alternatives are mentioned, which is a gap.

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