get_pipeline_run

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 discloses that the result is 'full, untruncated' (implying complete data without pagination), but does not mention authentication requirements, error behavior, or rate limits. The output schema covers return structure, but the description adds minimal behavioral context.

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 sentences with no unnecessary padding. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the usage hint is placed immediately after. It is concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are defined separately. However, the description does not explain two of the three required parameters, nor does it mention authentication or error handling. The guidance to fetch run_id first is helpful, but the overall context is incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only hints at run_id via the usage note, but does not explain resource_group or factory_name at all. The agent is left to infer these from context, which is insufficient for a required-parameter-heavy tool.

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 states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'single pipeline run', and adds the specific qualifier 'full, untruncated detail'. This distinguishes it from list_pipeline_runs, which lists runs, though it does not explicitly name other siblings like get_failed_activity_details.

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 second sentence provides a concrete usage prerequisite: 'Get run_id from list_pipeline_runs first.' This tells the agent where to obtain a required parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when this tool should be preferred over alternatives like get_failed_activity_details.

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