Snowflake Resume Task

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, so the description carries less burden. However, it adds almost no behavioral detail beyond the word 'suspended'—it omits what happens to task state, permission requirements, or side effects.

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 one-sentence description is front-loaded and wastes no words. It could be seen as under-specified, but that is a completeness issue rather than a conciseness flaw.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety/idempotency, the description need not explain return values or safety. For a simple resume operation, the action and its precondition are clear, but the complete absence of parameter guidance leaves a noticeable gap.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the three parameters. It gives no indication that task_name is required or that database/schema_name are optional qualifiers, leaving the agent without guidance for invocation.

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 gives a specific verb ('Resume') and resource ('task'), immediately distinguishing it from read/list siblings. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like suspend_task or describe its relationship to them, which keeps it from a 5.

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 description only restates the action; it offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., required privileges, task state), and no mention of when to choose a different sibling tool. The implied condition that the task must be suspended is the only usage hint.

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