snowflake_list_event_tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'List event tables' and does not disclose scope, filtering behavior, read-only guarantees, or any side effects. The word 'List' mildly implies a read operation, but important behavioral details such as whether it searches across all databases or within a specified context are absent.

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 with no wasted words. It immediately identifies the resource and its purpose, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The description gives enough context for a basic list operation, and the presence of an output schema helps with return-value understanding. However, it is thin for a tool with three optional filtering parameters and no annotations, leaving gaps around parameter semantics and the exact set of tables returned.

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 description does not explain any of the three optional parameters. The parameter names and titles are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to clarify how pattern, database, and schema_name interact or what filters they apply.

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 action ('List') and the specific resource ('event tables'), and adds the domain context of 'application logging, tracing, and SPCS telemetry.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like snowflake_list_tables and snowflake_list_iceberg_tables without needing further detail.

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 when this tool is appropriate—when event tables for logging, tracing, or SPCS telemetry are needed—but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare against alternatives like snowflake_list_tables. The usage context is clear enough but no exclusions or alternative routing is provided.

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