Snowflake Describe Stage

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds no behavioral context beyond annotations: no note on permissions, no result format, no failure modes when the stage is missing. With annotations carrying the safety burden the bar is lower, but this adds almost nothing extra.

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?

One efficient sentence with no filler and the primary resource front-loaded. Its brevity is appropriate, though it borders on under-specification for a describing tool.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but the description is otherwise thin: no usage guidance, no parameter semantics, no prerequisites. For a describe tool with 0% param coverage, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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% for three parameters. The description mentions the stage object but does not explain database/schema_name qualification semantics, nor whether omitting them falls back to the current context. It fails to compensate for the coverage 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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Describe stage') and enumerates what is returned (URL, storage integration, file format properties). This distinguishes it from write siblings like snowflake_create_stage or snowflake_drop_stage, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with snowflake_list_stages or snowflake_list_stage_files.

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 when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as snowflake_list_stages (enumeration) or snowflake_list_stage_files (contents). The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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