list_pipelines

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

The description discloses the return content ('List of pipeline templates with their required header schemas') and adds a critical note about preferring 'id' over the legacy 'pipeline_id'. As a non-annotated, read-only list operation, this covers key behavioral aspects, though it omits permission requirements and potential pagination behavior.

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 three sentences, each conveying essential information: purpose, return type, and a usage caveat. No redundant or unnecessary content.

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 zero-parameter listing tool, the description is fairly complete, specifying the return type and an important id-related instruction. A minor gap is that it does not clarify whether the list is filtered by permissions or workspace, but this is not critical for the tool's core function.

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?

The tool accepts no parameters, so the description has nothing to add beyond the schema. Per the rubric, a no-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4.

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 tool lists workflow templates/pipelines that can be started, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from list_processes by explicitly focusing on templates, not running instances.

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 a precursor to starting a process, and the note about using 'id' is a useful usage tip. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_processes or list_blueprints, and no exclusions are mentioned.

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