update_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that select_body is executed verbatim as DDL, a critical behavioral trait. However, it omits permissions required, side effects on dependent objects, or whether validation occurs before execution.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main action, and includes a caution and parameter list. Every sentence is necessary with no 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 DDL tool with 4 required params, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and parameter explanations. However, it lacks information on error handling, reversibility, or prerequisites, making it moderately complete.

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 description adds meaning. It explains each parameter: workspace, item, qualified_name with example, and select_body. This compensates adequately for the lack of schema descriptions, though it could add more format details.

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 'Redefine a SQL view via CREATE OR ALTER VIEW', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_view' and 'drop_view', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'create_view'.

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 caution about executing select_body verbatim as DDL provides partial guidance, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., create_view for new views, alter_view if needed). No exclusion criteria or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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