Pipeline actions

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description aligns with these. It adds minor context by mentioning all four actions (create/retry/cancel/delete) but does not disclose additional behaviors like permission requirements or side effects beyond the annotation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that captures all primary actions without wasting words. It is concise and scannable.

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?

The tool has multiple actions and five parameters, but the schema descriptions clarify conditional requirements (ref/variables for create, pipeline_id for retry/cancel/delete). The description provides a high-level summary; while it doesn't enumerate parameter dependencies, the schema compensates well. No output schema exists, so no return-value explanation is required.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema except summarizing that retry/cancel/delete apply to existing pipelines and create needs a ref. This is consistent with baseline 3 since the schema carries most semantic weight.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: triggering a new pipeline or retrying/canceling/deleting an existing one. It uses a specific verb set and resource (pipeline), immediately distinguishing it from read-only pipeline tools like list_pipelines or get_pipeline.

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 implies usage for pipeline lifecycle actions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_pipelines or generic API requests. It lacks explicit exclusion or alternative guidance, but the context is clear enough for basic selection.

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