get_pipeline_ddl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only retrieval and the database default is disclosed, but the description does not state behavior for missing pipelines, permissions, or whether any side effects occur. It does not contradict the absence of annotations.

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 compact and well organized: one clear purpose sentence followed by a brief, relevant Args list. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy or filler.

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 two-parameter retrieval tool, the description covers the return value, the required parameter, and the optional parameter's default behavior. It does not cover error cases or explicitly route between siblings, but the output schema supplies additional structure and the use case is straightforward.

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 description documents both parameters. The database parameter explanation ('defaults to the connection's configured database') adds real meaning beyond the schema's nullable default of null, which is valuable because the schema itself has no property descriptions.

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 specific verb ('Get') with a precise resource ('full CREATE PIPELINE statement') and outcome ('reproduces an existing pipeline'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_pipeline, drop_pipeline, and list_pipelines.

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 intended use case is implied: you call this when you need the DDL to reproduce an existing pipeline. However, the description does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer the choice from sibling names.

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