Snowflake Undrop Schema

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 write-but-non-destructive profile is covered structurally. The description contributes the Time Travel mechanism and the 'recently' qualifier hinting at a retention window, but it never states the actual retention limit, required privileges, or what happens if the window has expired.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and the overriding constraint ('recently dropped') come first.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Still, for a restore tool with two undocumented parameters and a hard Time Travel retention boundary, the description omits the operational facts an agent needs (retention window, required role, handling of an optional database qualifier).

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 says nothing about the two parameters. It does not explain that 'name' is the schema identifier or that 'database' is an optional qualifier that presumably defaults to the current database context — a meaningful ambiguity for a restore operation.

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?

Names a specific verb (Restore) and resource (a recently dropped schema), and the 'undrop_schema' naming plus the Time Travel mechanism clearly separates it from snowflake_drop_schema and from snowflake_undrop_database. However, it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling undrop tools, leaving that inference to the agent.

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?

'Restore a recently dropped schema' implies the triggering situation (an accidental or unwanted DROP), which is useful context. It names no alternative tool and states no when-not conditions, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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