snowflake_describe_stage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implicitly indicates a read-only introspection operation by using 'Describe', but it does not mention any access requirements, side effects, or limitations. It names the output aspects but not the return structure or potential errors. This is the minimum viable disclosure.

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 that directly states the tool's function without any filler. Every word carries meaning, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. No unnecessary information is present.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values, but it still lacks parameter clarification and usage context. For an agent to correctly invoke it, the description does not help with parameter selection or disambiguation from similar describes (e.g., snowflake_describe_table). Overall, it is incomplete for practical usage.

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% — the description does not reference any of the three parameters (database, schema_name, stage_name). It fails to clarify which parameter is required or how they relate to the stage location. Since the schema already provides names but no descriptions, the tool needs this compensation and does not provide it.

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 ('stage'), and names the exact aspects covered: location URL, storage integration, and file format properties. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like snowflake_list_stages (which lists stages) and snowflake_create_stage (which creates them).

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or contrasting scenarios with siblings such as list_stages or list_stage_files. An agent is left to infer usage from the name and description alone.

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