get_pipeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly states the tool is read-only (returns a board), which is clear, but doesn't disclose whether revenue totals depend on existing data, whether historical or current pipeline is shown, or any rate-limit or permission requirements. Basic read-behavior is conveyed adequately.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, enumerates the stage taxonomy, and mentions revenue totals. Zero waste—every element serves a purpose.

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 read-only list/aggregate tool with a single optional param and no output schema, the description covers the pipeline grouping and revenue totals. It could name the distinguishing sibling (list_deals) or note deal counts per stage, but for the tool's complexity the coverage is essentially 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%, so the workspaceId param is already documented in the schema as 'Optional workspace UUID to filter pipeline.' The description adds minimal param meaning beyond the schema, but the optional-scoping semantics are already well covered. 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?

Uses a specific verb+resource ('Get the full sales pipeline board') and clearly enumerates the stages grouping. It distinguishes from siblings like list_deals (which lists deals) and move_deal_stage (which changes stages), though it doesn't explicitly name the distinguishing sibling.

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 implies this is for viewing aggregate pipeline data rather than individual deals, and the optional workspace filter suggests scoping usage. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over list_deals or get_autopilot_status, leaving the choice to inference from sibling names.

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