snowflake_create_stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the creation action but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, idempotency (though if_not_exists default may hint), or the nature of a CDC stream. There is no mention of storage impact or that the stream captures changes. This is minimal and insufficient given the lack of annotations.

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 sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the core action. It is appropriately concise for a simple create operation, though it under-specifies details. There is no wasted text, and the structure is clear.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the append_only option, the if_not_exists behavior, or the requirement for an existing table/view. It also fails to describe what a CDC stream is or what happens after creation, leaving an agent without sufficient context to call it correctly.

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. It does not explain any parameters; it only mentions the action and target. While parameter names like stream_name and on_table are somewhat self-explanatory, the meaning of append_only and if_not_exists (which have defaults but no descriptions) is not clarified. The description adds no value beyond the schema's structural information.

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 a clear action: 'Create a CDC stream on a table or view.' It uses a specific verb (create) and resource (CDC stream) with a target (table or view), distinguishing it from other create tools like create_table or create_database. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as snowflake_list_streams, snowflake_describe_stream, or snowflake_drop_stream. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., existing table or view) or contexts where creating a stream is appropriate. The description simply states the action without any usage direction.

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