create_pipeline

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates a write operation ('creates'), describes output storage, and return of an object ID. However, it does not disclose whether existing pipelines with the same name are overwritten, nor any authorization or rate limit details.

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 front-loaded with the purpose sentence and includes useful examples. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds value, and the structure is logical.

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 description covers creation, parameters, reference mechanism, output format (object ID with preview), and how to use the object store. It lacks only error scenarios or potential conflicts, but is fairly complete for a 2-parameter required 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?

Despite 0% schema coverage reported, the description lists both parameters (pipeline_name, yaml_configuration) with brief explanations and adds the critical detail that parameters accept object references (@obj_id syntax). This goes well beyond the raw schema.

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 'Creates a new pipeline within the currently configured deepset workspace', specifying the verb (creates) and resource (pipeline). This distinguishes well from sibling tools like create_pipeline_version and create_workspace.

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 provides usage context through examples and explains parameter references. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this vs sibling tools like create_pipeline_version, nor does it mention preconditions or when not to use.

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