pipelines_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It covers return content (pipelines, stages, active/inactive, order_nr, deal_probability). Lacks authentication, rate limits, or pagination info, but adequate for a read-only list.

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?

Well-structured: summary, workflow tips, common use cases. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Concise and 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?

Completeness is good given no output schema and zero parameters. Explains what is returned and common uses. Could mention response format or limits, but sufficient for a simple list.

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 exist (schema coverage 100%), so the description adds meaning by explaining returned fields and workflow value. Exceeds baseline by clarifying fields like order_nr and deal_probability.

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 lists all pipelines and includes their stages. It distinguishes from siblings like pipelines_get (single pipeline) and pipelines_create by being a list operation.

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?

Workflow tips and common use cases explicitly guide when to use, e.g., getting pipeline IDs, checking stages, verifying configuration. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use (e.g., for a single pipeline).

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