notion_describe_database

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core behavior (retrieves schema, returns property names/types) and adds context about how to find database_id. However, it does not disclose potential error conditions, rate limits, or any prerequisites beyond knowing the database_id. For a simple read-only operation this is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 and well-structured. The first sentence states the purpose and return value, while the second provides crucial parameter guidance. No unnecessary words or redundant information are present.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, no nested objects), and an output schema is present. The description explains what the tool does, what it returns, and how to get the input parameter. It also ties the tool into a broader workflow with related tools. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 provides only the parameter name 'database_id' with no description. The tool description compensates fully by explaining what database_id is and exactly how to obtain it: 'calling notion_list_files_on_page on the page that holds the inline database (child_database blocks will show), or pasted from the database URL.' This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource ('Notion database's schema'). It states what is returned ('each property name and type') and distinguishes this from siblings by focusing on schema retrieval rather than querying or modifying data. The additional note about finding exact column names for upload tools clarifies its intended niche.

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 an explicit use case: 'use this to find the exact files & media column name to pass to notion_upload_file_to_database / notion_add_file_to_row.' It also explains how to obtain the database_id via a sibling tool or URL. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives like notion_query_database, so it lacks full exclusionary guidance.

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