gitlab_get_pipeline_jobs

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds value by detailing output contents (stage, status, duration, web URL) and the intended drill-down use case. No contradiction, but could mention pagination or rate limits.

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?

Concise and well-structured with examples, alternatives, and exclusions in a few sentences. Every sentence adds value.

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 the presence of an output schema, description effectively covers purpose, usage, alternatives, and examples. Complete for a list tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. Description adds minimal extra semantics beyond examples; 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?

Description clearly states 'List jobs of a pipeline with stage, status, duration and web URL', specifying the resource and returned fields. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly saying not to use for overall pipeline status, pointing to gitlab_get_pipeline instead.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: 'after noticing a failed pipeline to drill down into which specific job broke and fetch its log via gitlab_get_job_log'. Includes examples with parameter values and a clear exclusion: 'Don't use for overall pipeline status — use gitlab_get_pipeline instead.'

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