snowflake_describe_pipe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the output ('definition and COPY statement') but does not clarify that this is a read-only operation, any required permissions, or whether side effects are absent. It is not misleading, but it lacks substantive behavioral context.

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 concise at one sentence, which is economical, but it is under-specified. The sentence earns its place but does not carry enough information to be effective. It is short rather than appropriately sized.

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 that an output schema exists and there are only three parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output structure beyond 'definition and COPY statement', how database/schema defaults work, or how the pipe name is qualified. An agent would need to inspect the schema or make assumptions.

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 parameter meaning. It does not mention any of the three parameters (database, pipe_name, schema_name) or their roles, leaving the agent to infer usage from names alone. This is a significant gap.

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 specific verb ('Describe') and resource ('pipe'), and clarifies that it returns the definition and COPY statement. This is clear and distinguishable from other describe tools based on the resource type, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like snowflake_get_pipe_status.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as snowflake_list_pipes or snowflake_get_pipe_status. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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