get-log-pipelines

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

Describes return fields (pipeline names, filters, processors, enabled status) but no annotations provided. For a simple list operation, transparency is adequate but lacks depth on auth, rate limits, or potential pagination.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, example queries, return value and importance. No wasted words; information is front-loaded.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and why it's important. Complete for a simple listing 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?

No parameters defined in schema (0 params), so description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline 4 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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?

Clearly states 'List all log processing pipelines' with verb and resource, and provides example queries. However, does not differentiate from the similar sibling 'get-logs-pipelines' (note plural), lacking explicit distinction.

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?

Provides example questions users might ask, like 'how are logs being processed', giving context for usage. But no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives; guidance is implied.

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