Snowflake Get Column Lineage

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. The description adds a useful hint about the data source (Access History) but omits retention windows or other limitations of that source.

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 action and mechanism lead. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the missing detail elsewhere.

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 need no explanation, but for a six-parameter tool with zero schema coverage the description leaves too much unspecified: how lineage scope is bounded, what days/limit control, and how it differs from the other lineage tools.

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% across six parameters (days, limit, database, table_name, column_name, schema_name). The description only implies a column target and never explains the role of days, limit, or the optional schema/database qualifiers, leaving the parameters undocumented in both places.

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 specific verb (trace) and resource (column lineage) and names the underlying mechanism (Horizon Access History). However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like snowflake_get_object_lineage or snowflake_discover_schema_lineage, so an agent cannot tell from the text which lineage tool to pick.

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 guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling lineage tools it competes with. The agent receives no signal about when column-level lineage is preferable to object-level or schema-level lineage.

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