list-stages

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It notes that stages reference their pipeline, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, pagination behavior, or other side effects. While 'List' implies non-destructive, the description offers limited behavioral detail beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 is a straightforward list operation with well-covered input parameters. The description clarifies the stage-pipeline relationship and provides a usage pointer for counting, which is sufficient for common list-tool contexts. No output schema exists, but the description conveys the essential data shape (stages reference pipelines).

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 high (88%), so parameters are well-documented. The description adds value by tying the filter_by parameter to a concrete example (stage_id) and hinting at the pipeline reference, which helps the agent understand how to use filtering effectively.

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 opens with 'List all pipeline stages,' a specific verb+resource statement. It further distinguishes the tool from siblings by noting that each stage references its pipeline and explicitly pointing to list-matters for counting, clarifying what this tool does not do.

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 gives explicit guidance for a common alternative use case: 'To count matters per stage, use list-matters with filter_by: stage_id.' This directly tells the agent when to choose a different tool, providing clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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