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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by disclosing the permission scoping ("the role can see") and the account-setup prerequisite, both of which affect whether a call returns useful results.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the prerequisite, then the downstream consumer. No filler 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?

Complete enough for a no-argument read tool: it says what comes back, what gates it, and where the output is used. With no output schema, a brief note on the shape of the returned list (names only vs. metadata) would have closed the remaining gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline for a no-parameter tool; the description correctly adds no invented argument guidance.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Snowflake databases) with an explicit scope: only those visible to the user's connected Snowflake role. The scope bound plus the link to import_snowflake_lineage makes it distinguishable from the other import_* and list_* siblings.

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?

Provides a clear precondition (the user must connect Snowflake under Settings > Connected apps) and a forward-use hint (pass a returned database name to import_snowflake_lineage). It stops short of stating when not to use it or naming competing discovery tools, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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