runPipeline

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, yet it only states the trigger action. It does not mention that starting a pipeline is asynchronous, has side effects (consumes CI resources), may require authentication, or what the response will be.

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 a single, front-loaded, waste-free sentence that immediately communicates the core action. It is concise, though brevity comes at the cost of omitting important context.

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 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description is insufficient. An agent would still need to infer the role of workspace and repo_slug, when selector_pattern is required, and what happens after the call succeeds.

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 71%, so most parameters already have descriptions. The description adds light meaning by mentioning 'branch, tag, or custom pipeline', which maps to ref_type and selector_type, but it does not help with the undocumented repo_slug or workspace parameters, nor does it clarify variables.

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 and resource ('Trigger a new pipeline run') and distinguishes the tool from read-only siblings like listPipelineRuns, getPipelineRun, and stopPipeline. The modifier 'on a branch, tag, or custom pipeline' further narrows the tool's scope.

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 word 'new' implies that this tool is for starting a pipeline rather than listing or inspecting one, but it never explicitly tells the agent when to choose this over alternatives like listPipelineRuns or stopPipeline. The guidance is largely implicit.

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