kommo_pipelines

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states a read-only listing operation, implying no side effects. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral aspects such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. The description is adequate but could be more explicit about the safety profile.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. The first sentence defines the output, and the second provides usage context. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description provides essential information: what the tool returns (pipelines and stages with id, name, order) and when to use it. It could be slightly improved by noting that the output is a list or by providing an example, but it is largely complete for a simple listing tool.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, which is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it lists all pipelines and stages with id, name, and order. The specific verb 'lista' (lists) and resource 'funis e suas etapas' are unambiguous. The purpose is further clarified by indicating it's used to discover pipeline_id/status_id, distinguishing it from siblings like kommo_create_lead or kommo_search_leads.

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 explicitly says to use this tool 'para descobrir pipeline_id/status_id antes de criar ou mover leads.' This provides clear context for when to invoke it. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the guidance is sufficient given the sibling tools that perform other operations.

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