list_pipeline_runs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state that, nor does it explain pagination behavior via continuationToken, the default and maximum page size, the effect of projectId defaulting to no default project, or what the returned run records look like.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no wasted wording. However, its extreme brevity leaves substantial behavior unstated for a ten-parameter tool, so conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 ten-parameter listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It should at minimum clarify pagination, default project context, and how it differs from get_pipeline_run and pipeline_timeline.

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 100%, so all ten parameters are already documented in the input schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the phrase 'recent,' and that phrase arguably conflicts with the schema's arbitrary createdFrom/createdTo range filtering.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List recent runs for a pipeline.' An agent can tell it returns a collection of pipeline runs, but the word 'recent' is imprecise given that the schema exposes createdFrom/createdTo and orderBy. It also does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_pipeline_run or pipeline_timeline.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as get_pipeline_run for a single run or pipeline_timeline for run details, and no stated prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the phrase 'recent runs.'

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