Snowflake Describe User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the description doesn't need to restate it. The description adds no behavioral context such as required privileges to inspect another user or what happens if the user does not exist, so it is adequate but thin for a metadata-read tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and returned fields come first. It is efficiently sized, though it is arguably too terse given the undocumented parameter.

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 the description need not explain return values. However, with the only parameter undocumented in the schema and no usage guidance against a large set of describe/list siblings, the definition is minimally complete rather than fully self-sufficient.

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% and the sole required parameter user_name has no description anywhere. The description does not clarify whether user_name is a login name, an identifier requiring quoting, or case-sensitive, so it fails to compensate for the schema 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 gives a specific verb (Describe) and resource (user) and enumerates the returned attributes (email, disabled status, default warehouse/role), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling snowflake_list_users, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 states no condition for when to use this over snowflake_list_users (bulk listing) or snowflake_list_grants_to_user. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-routing guidance of any kind.

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