cortex_pipeline_plan

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

With no annotations, the description indicates a non-destructive preview. But it omits details on side effects (likely none), permissions, or recurrence 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?

Single sentence, zero wasted words, front-loads the primary action clearly.

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?

No output schema and description fails to explain what the preview returns (e.g., list of tasks). Lacks completeness for a preview 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% and description reinforces the 'goal' parameter. However, description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's field description.

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 uses specific verb 'preview' and resource 'tasks a pipeline would create for a goal', clearly distinguishing from siblings like cortex_pipeline_start (which starts) and cortex_pipeline_status (which shows status).

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?

States 'without starting it', implying use for planning before execution. While no explicit when-not or alternatives, the context of sibling tools makes usage clear.

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