Fetch pipeline document

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, and the description adds context beyond them: local-only with no auth or rate limits, a missing pipeline is an error rather than an empty result, no truncation, and path-validation rules rejecting roots outside 03_管线库/ and community/*/pipelines/ and '..' escapes.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then constraints and error semantics in tight order; content is dense but every sentence carries a distinct fact. Slightly longer than minimal, but no filler.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, everything an agent needs is present: usage routing, accepted identifier forms, path restrictions, and error behavior. Return format is correctly left to the output schema.

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 100% and the schema already documents the single 'pipeline' parameter, but the prose adds real meaning beyond it: the Pxx stem is matched against the filename prefix, and the accepted path roots and the '..' escape rejection clarify the accepted syntax.

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+resource: 'Read one NF pipeline's full Markdown by P-number or repository-relative path.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from pipeline_list, module_read and asset_read in the same breath, so an agent can select it without opening any schema.

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 explicit when-to-use ('after pipeline_list identifies a pipeline') and when-not-to-use with named alternatives for both the listing case (pipeline_list) and the module/asset case (module_read / asset_read). Routing guidance is complete.

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