pipeline.status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a genuinely useful behavioral trait — poll every 1-2s while status is 'running' — which tells the agent this is a non-blocking read. However it omits permissions, whether the polling is safe/throttled, and what the response contains beyond the status field.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the parameter guidance and the polling note. Every sentence adds distinct information.

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 read-only status tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers invocation mode, parameter routing, and polling behavior adequately. It does not describe the returned payload shape, but an agent can still call it correctly and interpret the 'running' vs terminal distinction.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: run_id is tied to 'a specific run' and skill_id + limit to 'recent runs'. The meaning of limit (how many recent runs) is only implied rather than stated, leaving a minor 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get pipeline run status'), clearly distinct from pipeline.run and pipeline.config by virtue of being a read of run state. It does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast itself, so it falls short of a 5.

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 concrete selection guidance between the two access modes ('run_id for a specific run, or skill_id + limit for recent runs') and tells the agent how to behave while waiting. It lacks any when-not or alternative-tool routing (e.g. use pipeline.run to start a run), so it is clear context rather than full exclusions.

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