Snowflake List Views

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

Annotations already establish the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description only needs to add context. It adds none: no account of the 'pattern' filtering behavior, pagination, or result limits for what could be a large view listing.

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 short sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise for a tool with three unconstrained parameters. Nothing is padded, yet little is conveyed.

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 values need not be described. But with three optional parameters at 0% coverage and no usage guidance, the definition leaves critical invocation details (how pattern/database/schema_name interact, defaults) unspecified.

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 all three parameters (pattern, database, schema_name) are undocumented in both schema and description. The phrase 'in a database schema' weakly implies the database/schema_name params, but 'pattern' is completely unexplained, leaving the agent guessing at its matching semantics.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List views') and scopes it to a database schema, so the agent knows exactly what it returns. However, it offers no differentiation from the many other list tools in the family (e.g., snowflake_list_tables, snowflake_list_iceberg_tables).

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as snowflake_list_tables or snowflake_describe_schema, nor any stated prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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