execute-snowflake-sql

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Execute a SQL query' implies a write operation could occur, the description doesn't specify whether this tool supports read-only queries, requires specific permissions, has transaction implications, or includes any rate limits. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's function. There's zero wasted language, and it's front-loaded with the essential information. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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 SQL execution tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'return the result' means - whether it's a data table, success/failure status, or something else. Given the complexity of database operations and the lack of structured metadata, the description should provide more complete context about behavior and outputs.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'sql' clearly documented as 'SQL query to execute'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Execute a SQL query') and target resource ('on Snowflake'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'execute-query' or 'query-view', which appear to have similar functions.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'execute-query' or 'query-view'. There's no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or appropriate contexts for selecting this specific SQL execution tool over others in the sibling set.

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