List pipeline schedules

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive behavior. The description adds a valuable transparency detail by stating that variable values are not exposed, which is not covered by the annotations. This extra information about data privacy goes beyond the basic safety hints.

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, concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose and a key behavioral note. It contains no fluff or redundancy, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 list operation, the description is adequate. It clearly states what is listed and the caveat about variables. While it doesn't mention pagination or filtering options, those are defined in the schema, so the description does not need to elaborate. The output format is implied to be a list of schedules, and the description sufficiently sets expectations.

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 covers four parameters, but only one (project) has a description. The tool description does not explain any of the parameters, nor does it compensate for the low schema coverage. It fails to clarify the meanings of 'page', 'scope', or 'per_page', leaving the agent with insufficient parameter understanding.

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 tool's function: listing pipeline schedules for a project. It also adds a specific detail (not exposing variable values) that distinguishes it from other list operations. The verb 'List' and resource 'project pipeline schedules' are explicit.

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 over alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios or comparisons with similar tools like get_pipeline_schedule or list_pipelines. The name gives some implied context, but explicit usage directions are absent.

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