Export a pipeline DAG as a standard Mermaid diagram string from its pipeline ID, enabling visual representation of data flow for review or documentation.
Export pipeline DAG structure as standard Mermaid diagram string.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pipeline_id | Yes | Target pipeline ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key behavioral trait: the return is a Mermaid diagram string rather than raw JSON. However, it omits whether the operation is read-only, error behavior when the pipeline_id is invalid, and any size/pagination constraints on the output.
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 that conveys verb, resource, and output format with zero wasted words.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description communicates the return type, which is its main obligation. It remains thin on error conditions and the read-only nature of the operation, so it is adequate but not fully complete.
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 100% – the single pipeline_id parameter is documented in the schema as "Target pipeline ID." The description adds no further meaning (no ID format, no required existence), so the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb ("Export"), a concrete resource ("pipeline DAG structure"), and the output format ("standard Mermaid diagram string"). It is clearly distinguishable from the mutation/query siblings like create_pipeline and run_pipeline, though it never explicitly names or contrasts against them.
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 description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., pipeline must exist), and no note on how the returned diagram is intended to be consumed. The verb "Export" implies a visualization use case but nothing is stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.