upsert_rows

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it clarifies the upsert logic (update vs. insert), rejection of unknown columns, and limitations on link/file types. Annotations indicate idempotentHint: true and destructiveHint: false, which aligns with the upsert behavior. However, more detail on rate limits or error handling would elevate this.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence adds important caveats. Slightly more could be said about behavior with partial key matches.

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 the complexity of an upsert operation and the presence of sibling tools, the description covers the essentials: logic, constraints, and alternatives. No output schema exists, but the description doesn't need to detail return values. Could mention if there is a limit on number of key_columns.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description adds value by explaining that key_columns are for matching, but does not elaborate on row object structure beyond 'column name -> value'; schema already describes that.

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 verb 'Batch upsert rows' and specifies the resource 'rows' against a table. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by explicitly mentioning that link and file/image columns cannot be set here and should use link_rows/unlink_rows or upload_file instead.

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 provides explicit usage context: it describes the matching logic (match on key columns, update if exists, insert otherwise), and explicitly states when not to use it (for link and file/image columns), directing to sibling tools.

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