pipeline_status

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It signals a read-only lookup through 'Get the current state' and discloses the important edge behavior of returning an empty row list when the pipeline doesn't exist. It doesn't discuss permissions or rate limits, but for a status-read tool the key behavior is covered.

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?

Every sentence adds value: action, equivalence, missing-pipeline behavior, and the two parameters. The key semantics are front-loaded before the args detail, with no redundant 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?

This is a simple two-parameter lookup with an output schema available, so return details need not be repeated. The description fully equips an agent to select and call the tool correctly, including the optional database context and empty-result behavior.

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 input schema has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the Args section must compensate. It explains pipeline_name as the lookup key and database as the owning database with a useful default tied to the connection's configured database, adding meaning beyond the bare names.

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 first sentence names a specific action and resource: 'Get the current state of one pipeline by name.' The SHOW PIPELINES equivalence and the 'single pipeline' phrasing clearly separate it from 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 description conveys this is for a targeted single-pipeline lookup and that a missing name yields an empty list rather than an error. It does not explicitly name list_pipelines as the alternative for retrieving all pipelines, so the when-not-to-use guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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