snowflake_list_alerts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'List' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permission requirements, or any side effects. It also does not mention whether the results are limited by the user's access or if it queries system views. Minimal disclosure leaves the agent guessing about safety and constraints.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource. However, it is too brief to convey necessary details, which slightly reduces its structural effectiveness, but it is appropriately concise for the scope it covers.

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?

For a tool with three optional parameters and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not explain how to use the filters, what happens if no parameters are provided, or the scope of alerts returned. The existence of an output schema helps with return values, but the input semantics are severely lacking, making the tool difficult to invoke correctly.

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 and explain the parameters. It does not mention 'pattern', 'database', or 'schema_name' at all, leaving their purpose and how they filter the results entirely unclear. The agent cannot correctly use these optional filters without additional context.

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 identifies the action ('List'), the resource ('configured alerts'), and adds specific content ('condition queries, schedules, and state'). It distinguishes from sibling list tools like snowflake_list_tasks and snowflake_list_streams by the alert focus, and from describe_alert by the list vs. detail distinction.

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 implies usage for listing alerts but provides no explicit alternative guidance. It does not mention when to use this versus snowflake_describe_alert for a single alert, nor does it address exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear from the name, but the description adds no routing information.

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