list_build_definitions

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states that it lists definitions, with no mention of return format, output structure, permissions, pagination, or side effects. The phrase 'build/pipeline definitions' adds some clarity but still leaves behavior largely implicit.

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 concise sentence with no fluff or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool, though it could be slightly more informative about what 'definitions' entails.

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 lack of annotations and the presence of sibling tools, the description is too minimal to be contextually complete. It does not explain return values, filtering behavior, or relationships to other pipeline-related tools, leaving the agent with limited context for correct invocation.

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 input schema descriptions cover all three parameters (name, path, project) completely, so the tool description adds no additional meaning. Baseline is 3 because the schema does the heavy lifting for parameter understanding.

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 uses a clear verb and resource: 'List build/pipeline definitions.' It explains the tool's function and distinguishes it from listing actual builds (like list_builds) by focusing on 'definitions,' though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the similar 'list_pipelines' sibling tool.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_pipelines or list_release_definitions. The description only states what it does, without any context on prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions.

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