snowflake_describe_tag

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. The verb 'describe' implies read-only, but there is no explicit statement about permissions, side effects, or reversibility. It also doesn't mention what the output contains, though an output schema exists. This is minimal 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, clean sentence that efficiently states the purpose. It is front-loaded and free of fluff. While it could include more detail, it is appropriately concise for a simple describe operation.

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 three parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how database and schema_name affect the lookup, nor does it provide any usage context. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but parameter usage remains unexplained.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the parameters. It does not state that tag_name is required or how database and schema_name qualify the tag. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's titles, which is insufficient for proper invocation.

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 tool describes tag properties, allowed values, and comment. It identifies the resource (tag) and action (describe) unambiguously. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other describe tools, the tag resource is distinct among siblings, making the purpose clear.

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, no conditions, and no exclusions. It offers no context about scenarios where a tag description is needed or when to avoid it.

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