snowflake_create_role

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 says 'Create a new role,' which implies a mutating operation, but gives no details about failure modes (e.g., if the role already exists), the effect of the if_not_exists parameter, or required permissions. This is minimal and leaves critical behavior undisclosed.

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, concise sentence, which scores well on brevity. However, it lacks structure—it is under-specified and does not front-load any scoping, options, or guidance beyond the action itself. It is not verbose, but it is also not appropriately sized given the tool's complexity.

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 tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (though not shown), the description is incomplete. It does not mention command behavior on existing roles, return values, error conditions, or any side effects. An agent has no way to anticipate outcomes or handle edge cases from this description alone.

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 by explaining the parameters. It does not mention role_name, comment, or if_not_exists at all, providing no additional meaning beyond the schema's bare field names. This is a complete failure to aid parameter understanding.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'a new role in Snowflake,' making the primary purpose unambiguous. It does not differentiate from sibling create tools (e.g., create_database), but the role-specific naming removes most ambiguity.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like snowflake_describe_role or snowflake_drop_role, nor does it state any prerequisites (e.g., required privileges) or conditions under which creation should be attempted.

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