snowflake_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it warns about the daemon requirement, potential browser opening for SSO, and the YAML result format with a `statements` array. It also clarifies defaults for account/user and optional per-query context, which are important behavioral details beyond the schema.

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 dense but efficient: it front-loads the core action and output, then explains multi-statement behavior, daemon requirements, auth, and parameter defaults. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 tool with 8 parameters, a required sql, and no output schema, this description covers the return format, prerequisites, authentication side effects, and default resolution. Minor gaps like error handling or timeouts are not addressed, but overall it is a complete operational description.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining fallback logic for account/user and that warehouse/role/database/schema are per-query optional context, which is not fully captured by the schema descriptions alone.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource and output format ('Run SQL against Snowflake and return the result set(s) as YAML'), and clarifies multi-statement support with the `statements` array structure. It distinguishes itself from siblings like snowflake_sessions and snowflake_disconnect by its focus on executing queries.

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 clear operational context: it must be run through the omni-dev daemon (`omni-dev daemon start`), explains first-time SSO auth, and notes default account/user fallbacks. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the tool's role in the Snowflake toolset is clear from the description.

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