pipeline_get_definition

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations by warning that the operation is long-running and that it writes definition files to a directory, which is an important side effect for an agent to know before invoking.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the side effect/long-running caveat is stated immediately afterward, making the definition easy to scan and act on.

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 low-complexity, read-only tool with full parameter schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral context: long-running execution and file output. It does not explicitly describe return values, but the absence of an output schema is partially mitigated by the clear statement that files are written to a directory.

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%, so all three parameters are already well documented. The description only restates that definition files are written to outputDirectoryPath, adding no meaningful semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the verb and resource: get the definition of a data pipeline. It also adds a distinguishing side effect, writing definition files to an output directory, which separates it from metadata retrieval tools like pipeline_get and from mutation tools like pipeline_update_definition.

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 explains what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives such as pipeline_get, nor does it mention exclusions, prerequisites, or typical use cases. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the verb 'Get the definition'.

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