delete_pipeline

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is known; the description still adds real value with 'cannot be undone' and the non-obvious 'Does not affect past executions.' It omits what happens on a nonexistent pipeline name (error vs. silent no-op), which matters for a non-idempotent delete.

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?

Four short sentences that are front-loaded with the irreversible action and its consequences, with no filler or repetition. Every sentence contributes either scope, caution, or return behavior.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states it 'Returns a confirmation message on success,' and the annotations cover the safety profile. For a destructive, non-idempotent operation it could still specify failure behavior on an unknown pipeline, so it is strong but not fully complete.

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 100% and both required parameters (application, pipeline_name) are documented in-schema. The description adds no extra meaning such as name-vs-ID format or whether the application must already exist, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete a pipeline configuration from Spinnaker'), which cleanly separates it from the many get_/list_ siblings and from save_pipeline/update_pipeline. The adverb 'permanently' also signals how it differs from a soft/disable-style operation.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition: 'Use this only when a pipeline is no longer needed.' It stops short of naming an alternative for reversible cases (e.g., updating or deactivating a pipeline via update_pipeline), so the routing guidance is clear but not complete.

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