ghl_pipeline_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' transparently indicates a read-only operation, but it does not disclose return format, error behavior, or auth requirements. For a simple fetch, this is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 tool is simple (2 required params, no nested objects, no output schema). The description covers the core purpose, but since there is no output schema, mentioning what the response contains (e.g., 'returns the pipeline object') would improve completeness. Still, the low complexity makes this acceptable.

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?

Both parameters (pipelineId, locationId) are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional semantic value. The locationId description is slightly confusing ('if omitted' despite being required), but the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 'Get a specific pipeline by ID' clearly states the verb (Get), the resource (specific pipeline), and the key qualifier (by ID), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool ghl_pipelines_get (plural) that lists pipelines.

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 use case is implied by 'specific...by ID' — an agent should use this when it has a pipeline ID rather than needing a list. However, there is no explicit pointer to alternatives like ghl_pipelines_get for listing, or mention of when not to use this tool.

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