agent.pipeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or any behavior beyond the high-level action. The term 'managed sidecar adapter' is not explained.

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, which is concise, but its brevity sacrifices informativeness. It could be restructured to front-load the purpose and add parameter context.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no schema description, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. An agent lacks essential information to correctly invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It fails to explain any of the 5 parameters (model, tasks, maxTasks, staggerMs, concurrency). The agent cannot understand parameter semantics from the description alone.

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 the verb 'Run' and the resource 'external multi-agent pipeline', and specifies the mechanism 'through the managed sidecar adapter'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'agent.spawn' which likely spawns an agent. However, it could be more explicit about what constitutes a 'multi-agent pipeline'.

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 'agent.spawn'. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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