snowflake_list_integrations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It only states that it lists integrations; it does not disclose whether it requires permissions, the effect of the pattern parameter, or the exact scope of the listing. This is insufficient for a safe and correct invocation.

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 concise at one sentence, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It front-loads the resource but omits crucial details, so the brevity compromises usefulness.

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 the sparse description, no annotation coverage, and undocumented parameters, the definition is severely incomplete. Even though an output schema exists, the missing operational context (filtering, permissions, scope) makes it inadequate for reliable tool selection and use.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must explain the parameters. It does not mention 'pattern' at all and only vaguely references integration types via the categories. This fails to clarify how to use integration_type or pattern to filter results.

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 lists external integrations and enumerates categories (API, Storage, Notification, Security). This distinguishes it from other list tools that target different resources (tables, schemas, etc.), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions such as needing to inspect integrations or when a pattern filter is appropriate, leaving the agent without direction on selection.

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