Snowflake Inspect Table With Sample

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 that it previews sample rows, implying a data read, but it does not disclose sampling cost, row limits, or behavior when the table is empty or the path is ambiguous.

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 packs the composite purpose and its constituent outputs with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is arguably too terse given the zero parameter documentation.

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 shape needn't be restated, and the safety profile comes from annotations. The remaining gap is parameter qualification and sampling behavior, which the description does not cover despite 0% schema coverage.

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 carries the full burden for four parameters. It alludes to sampling via 'preview sample rows', loosely mapping to sample_rows, but says nothing about database, schema_name, the default of 5 rows, or how the table_name is qualified.

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 composite action and enumerates the outputs it produces (schema, row count, column types, sample rows). However, it does not name the overlapping siblings it bundles (snowflake_describe_table, snowflake_sample_table), so an agent must infer the distinction from the '1 call' phrasing alone.

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 'in 1 call' wording implies this should be preferred over issuing separate describe/sample calls, which is implicit usage guidance. It never states when to use it versus snowflake_describe_table or snowflake_sample_table, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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