snowflake_suspend_task

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation without explaining side effects, reversibility, required permissions, or impact on future task runs. For a mutating operation on a scheduler, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise (one short sentence), which is positive, but it is so minimal that it omits essential context. It is not bloated, but it also does not front-load any useful details beyond the core verb-resource pair. It is appropriately sized but under-informative.

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?

For a simple state-changing operation, the description is incomplete. It lacks any mention of expected behavior, error conditions, or what the output represents. Even though an output schema exists, the description does not explain the return value or any side effects. The tool's low complexity does not excuse the lack of context.

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%. The description does not explain any of the three parameters (database, task_name, schema_name), nor does it indicate that task_name is required. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema field names, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Suspend') and the resource ('active scheduled task'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like snowflake_resume_task and snowflake_execute_task, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them. It is unambiguous and actionable.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., the task must exist and be in a resumable state). No mention of context where suspension is appropriate or when to prefer other task-related tools.

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