List Pipeline Jobs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the description's behavioral burden is low. The description adds no extra context beyond the annotations, but it does not contradict them. It omits details like pagination behavior or default sorting, which would be helpful.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded, clearly stating the action and resource. However, its brevity comes at the cost of missing important details.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return structure, pagination, or filter options. An agent would struggle to use this tool effectively without additional knowledge.

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 fails to explain any of the 6 parameters. It doesn't mention that project_id and pipeline_id are required, nor provide meaning for 'scope' (e.g., filter values like 'failed', 'running') or other parameters. The description adds no value over the schema.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('jobs'), and the scope ('for a specific pipeline'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_get_pipeline (which gets pipeline info) and gitlab_get_job (single job).

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, filtering constraints, or comparison with related tools such as gitlab_get_pipeline_failed_jobs_summary or gitlab_trace_job_to_commit_and_merge_request.

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