snowflake_resume_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without disclosing the mutation effect, potential permissions required, or the state change from suspended to running. It adds no information beyond the basic operation, leaving the agent unaware of side effects or requirements.

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 short sentence with no fluff, which is efficient in length. However, it is under-specified to the point of being unhelpful; a concise description should still pack essential information, which it does not. The front-loading is fine but the content is minimal.

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?

While an output schema exists so return values need not be explained, the description fails to cover even the basic operational context. With three parameters and zero schema coverage, the description should at least clarify the purpose and naming of these parameters, but it does not. This leaves the tool underspecified for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage for parameters, and the description mentions none of them. The required 'task_name' and optional 'database'/'schema_name' are undocumented, forcing the agent to guess their semantics. The description provides no value in clarifying parameter meaning or defaults.

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 states a clear verb ('Resume') and resource ('task'), and specifies the target state ('suspended'). It is specific enough to distinguish this from other resume tools (e.g., resume_warehouse, resume_dynamic_table) that target different resource types. However, it is very close to a restatement of the tool name, adding only the word 'suspended'.

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, any prerequisites, or alternatives. The description does not mention that a task must be suspended before resuming, nor does it reference sibling tools like suspend_task or execute_task. An agent is left without context on the appropriate conditions for invocation.

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