snowflake_list_masking_policies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does convey a read-only listing operation and the supported scoping levels, which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination, permissions, how omitting parameters behaves, or any rate limits; for a non-destructive list operation this is acceptable but minimal.

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 sentence with no filler, placing the action and resource first. Every word contributes meaningful information, making it well-structured and appropriately sized.

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 output schema handles return-value shape, and the description gives the core operation and scoping options. Still, with no annotations and no explanation of pattern or relationship to sibling tools, an agent must infer important invocation details. This is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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 for the three undocumented parameters. It only hints that database and schema_name relate to scoping, and it leaves pattern completely unexplained. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not clarify the filter behavior or scope hierarchy.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List' + 'column masking policies', and states the scoping levels 'account, database, or schema'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like snowflake_describe_masking_policy by verb and snowflake_list_row_access_policies by object type.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as snowflake_describe_masking_policy or snowflake_list_row_access_policies. The only usage cue is implied by the verb and resource name, with no explicit routing or exclusions.

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