snowflake_describe_task

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation ('Describe') but doesn't state permissions required, side effects (likely none), or any other behavioral traits. It adds little beyond the verb itself.

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, compact sentence with zero filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly concise. However, brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be explained, but the description is still insufficient for an agent to determine correct usage, parameter roles, or when to invoke this tool among many siblings. It lacks essential usage context and parameter elaboration.

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 mentions what is described (definition, schedule, etc.) but does not clarify the meaning of database, schema_name, or task_name beyond what the schema names imply. There is no added semantic value for parameters.

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 action 'Describe' on task-related details (definition, schedule, warehouse, definition SQL), making the purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling describe tools (e.g., describe_warehouse), but the resource 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other describe tools or alternatives. The description gives no context about typical scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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