Snowflake Resume Compute Pool

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds the precondition ('idle or suspended') but omits useful context such as what happens on resume, how long it takes, or whether it targets the current connection's account.

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 with no waste and the verb front-loaded. Efficiency is high; the trade-off is that brevity leaves gaps rather than being over-long.

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-value explanation is not required, and annotations cover safety. However, with 0% param description coverage and no usage guidance for a state-changing control operation, the definition is only minimally sufficient.

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% – the single parameter 'pool_name' has no description in the schema. The tool description does not explain the naming convention, qualification format (e.g., database.schema.pool), or where to obtain the name. With 1 param documented nowhere, the description fails to compensate.

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?

Specific verb ('Resume') and resource ('SPCS compute pool'), with scope qualifiers ('idle or suspended') that distinguish it from siblings like snowflake_suspend_compute_pool. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 phrasing 'idle or suspended' implies a precondition, and the sibling list makes the suspend/resume pair obvious. But there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance (e.g., what happens if the pool is already active), so usage is only implied.

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