Snowflake Resize Warehouse

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds the range of valid sizes, which is genuinely useful, but omits operational context an agent would want for an in-flight mutation: whether resizing disrupts running queries, privilege requirements, or cost implications.

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 tight sentence with no filler, and the resource plus the operation are front-loaded. Size values appear inline where they help.

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, and annotations cover the safety profile. What remains missing is usage routing versus scale_and_execute, the meaning of warehouse_name, and the definitive set of valid sizes — enough gaps to keep this at minimum viable for a mutating tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It partially does by enumerating valid size values (XSMALL, SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE, XLARGE, 2XLARGE), which compensates for the missing enum in the schema. But warehouse_name is left completely unexplained, and the 'etc.' leaves the size list ambiguous about what the actual ceiling is.

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?

States a specific verb (Change) and resource (warehouse compute size), with the resource qualifier 'compute size' making the operation unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from the closest sibling, snowflake_warehouse_scale_and_execute, which an agent could easily confuse with a resize operation.

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 when-to-use context, prerequisites, or alternative routing is provided. The agent gets no signal on how this differs from scale_and_execute, resume_warehouse, or create_warehouse, all of which touch warehouse compute.

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