snowflake_cortex_translate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and engine, omitting details like language code formats, output structure, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is synchronous. This is a significant gap for an AI agent selecting the tool.

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 a single, focused sentence that conveys the essential action without fluff. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, though its brevity contributes to the lack of behavioral detail.

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 presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values, but it lacks critical operational details such as language format specifications and any limitations. For a simple translation tool, the description is thin, leaving the agent to guess at ambiguous parameters.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no additional meaning to the parameters 'text', 'source_language', and 'target_language'. It does not clarify accepted language formats (e.g., ISO codes vs. names) or any constraints, leaving the agent to infer from names alone.

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 identifies the action (translate), the resource (text), and the two key parameters (source and target languages). It distinguishes from other Cortex tools by explicitly naming the translation operation, making it unambiguous even without naming a specific alternative sibling.

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 implies usage when translation is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over other Cortex tools (e.g., snowflake_cortex_summarize) or any conditions for use. There is no mention of when not to use it or prerequisite context.

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