get_logs_pipeline_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source. It describes the output (ordered IDs, processing order) but does not disclose potential side effects, permissions needed, or data limitations. For a simple read-only tool with no parameters, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core action and result. Every word adds value, making it concise and well-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?

Given the low complexity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It specifies what is returned and the key property (order). Minor gaps exist (e.g., no mention of data freshness or sorting direction), but these are not critical for a simple list 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?

The tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. According to guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters, and the description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the 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 it retrieves the ordered list of log pipeline IDs, showing processing order. It is specific about the resource ('log pipeline IDs') and the verb ('Get'), and it distinguishes from similar list tools (e.g., 'get-log-pipelines') by emphasizing order.

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. While it implies use when ordering matters, it does not explicitly tell the agent when not to use it or mention sibling tools like 'get-log-pipelines' for unordered lists.

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