get_run_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions returning 'status' and 'full logs', but fails to specify if the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or the format of logs (e.g., paginated). This leaves behavioral gaps for an agent.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. While it lacks depth in other dimensions, for conciseness alone it is efficiently structured.

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 one parameter and no output schema. The description explains what the tool does but does not clarify the structure of the returned status or logs, or whether any error handling is involved. It is minimally complete for simple use but leaves the agent guessing about output format.

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% with the parameter 'run_id' described as 'The run ID returned by run_pipeline'. The description adds no additional nuance beyond restating that the tool uses a run ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already defines it.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'status and full logs of a pipeline run', along with the key identifier 'by its run ID'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'run_pipeline' (which creates a run) and 'list_pipelines' (which lists pipelines).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as indicating it should be used after 'run_pipeline' to check the run outcome. No explicit exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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