snowflake_get_warehouse_load_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('get') but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, whether any permissions are required, or what time range the history covers. The description is minimal and does not convey additional traits beyond the obvious.

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, front-loaded sentence containing no redundant words. It communicates the core function efficiently without any fluff or unnecessary detail.

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 that an output schema exists, the return structure is covered elsewhere, so that omission is acceptable. However, the description lacks contextual details such as whether the history is per-warehouse, what time window is considered, or any prerequisites. For a simple get operation, it is minimally adequate but could be more complete with a note about the scope or usage context.

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 only one parameter (warehouse_name) with no description, and the tool description does not mention it at all. Since schema_description_coverage is 0%, the description should have compensated by explaining the parameter's meaning or format, but it offers no additional value. The agent is left to infer that warehouse_name is a string identifier, which is not fully explicit.

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 retrieves load, queuing, and provisioning history for a specific warehouse. The verb 'Get' and resource 'warehouse load history' are specific, and it naturally distinguishes from siblings like get_query_history by focusing on warehouse-level metrics.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_query_history or describe_warehouse. The description only states what it does, with no mention of conditions, exclusions, or when a different tool would be more appropriate.

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