dryrun_pipeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states the tool does not write to the database, a key behavioral trait. It does not mention permissions, side effects, or error handling, but the 'dryrun' name reinforces the read-only nature. Sufficient for a non-destructive test tool.

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 concise, with a short paragraph front-loading the core purpose, followed by a clear list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to read.

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 the tool has 4 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the two usage modes and all parameters adequately. It could mention that the output schema describes return values, but that is covered by the output schema itself. Missing some details on data format validation, but overall 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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It clearly explains each parameter: pipeline (inline YAML), pipeline_name (saved, mutually exclusive), data (test data), data_type (optional). It also notes the mutual exclusivity, providing essential semantics beyond the schema's titles.

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 tests a pipeline with sample data without writing to the database, distinguishing it from siblings like create_pipeline or delete_pipeline. The verb 'Test' and resource 'pipeline' are specific, and the 'without writing' differentiates from mutation tools.

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 explains two mutually exclusive usage modes (inline YAML vs saved pipeline) and lists required arguments. It implicitly tells when to use by contrasting with writing to database, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives.

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