snowflake_create_alert

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

With no annotations, the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose one important safety trait—destructive actions require confirm=True—which goes beyond the raw schema. But it omits other relevant behavior such as required privileges, behavior when the alert name already exists, and that the alert will later execute action SQL on schedule.

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 concise sentences with no filler. It puts the core purpose first and then isolates the critical safety caveat about destructive actions.

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?

Combined with the schema and an output schema, this is minimally viable for an agent to attempt creation. However, it lacks alternative routing, prerequisite context, and explanations for several parameters, so it is not fully complete for correct invocation in all cases.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only mentions schedule, condition_sql, and action_sql by name without explaining their roles. It adds no semantics for alert_name, warehouse_name, database, schema_name, or comment; only confirm receives meaningful extra context.

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 states the exact action ('Create an alert') and names its core parts: schedule, condition SQL, and action SQL. This makes it clearly distinct from sibling alert tools like list, describe, drop, resume, and suspend, and even from create_task/create_pipe because the target resource is explicitly an alert.

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 intended use is apparent from the verb 'Create', and the confirm=True note adds a useful operational condition. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as snowflake_create_task for scheduled SQL work, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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