Find Failed Pipelines

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe reads. The description adds 'recent failed pipelines' but does not define 'recent' or clarify sorting/pagination behavior. It provides minimal additional context beyond the annotations.

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 sentence, which is concise but underspecified. It lacks needed details about parameters and behavior, making it insufficiently informative for the agent.

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?

Despite simple requirements (3 params, no output schema), the description fails to explain what 'recent' means, how results are ordered, or how to use parameters effectively. Annotations help but do not compensate for missing param documentation.

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%, meaning the JSON schema has no descriptions for the three parameters. The description does not mention any parameters, leaving the agent to guess that 'project_id' is required, 'ref' filters by branch/tag, and 'per_page' limits results. This is a critical gap.

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 verb 'find', the resource 'recent failed pipelines', and the scope 'for a project'. This distinguishes it from siblings like gitlab_list_pipelines (lists all pipelines) and gitlab_get_pipeline_failed_jobs_summary (focuses on failed jobs within a pipeline).

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 implies usage for finding recent failures but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like gitlab_list_pipelines or gitlab_get_pipeline_failed_jobs_summary. No 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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