gitlab_list_pipelines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'recent' but does not clarify default limits, ordering, or security/permission requirements. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit, and no caveats are mentioned.

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?

Single sentence with no filler words, front-loaded verb. However, it is minimal to the point of under-specification.

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 output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not cover the available filters, defaults, or expected return structure, making it incomplete for a 4-parameter 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?

There are 4 parameters with 0% schema description coverage. The description only alludes to 'project' but does not explain 'ref', 'limit', or 'status' filters, leaving the agent without semantic 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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'CI/CD pipelines' and scopes it to 'a GitLab project', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like gitlab_list_projects or gitlab_list_merge_requests.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or exclusions. The description implies usage when pipeline data is needed, but does not mention filtering scenarios or other tools.

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