pipeline_status

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

The description discloses the return content and the parameter but does not discuss side effects, error handling, or any constraints. Since no annotations are provided, it carries the full burden, and while adequate, it lacks details like what happens if the execution_id is invalid.

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 concise at two sentences plus one bullet, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant or unnecessary information.

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 simple status check tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose, return values, and parameter guidance. It could mention that the pipeline must be running, but overall it is fairly complete and commensurate with the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description adds meaning to the single parameter 'execution_id' by explaining its source (returned when starting a pipeline). Since schema description coverage is 0%, this is valuable and compensates for the missing schema description.

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 tool gets the current state of a pipeline execution, specifies the return values (execution state, completed steps, next step), and distinguishes it from siblings like pipeline_abort, pipeline_pause, etc.

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 the tool is used after starting a pipeline to check status, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus other pipeline tools, nor does it mention any prerequisites or alternatives.

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