Get Pipeline Statuses

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature by using 'Get' and lists the exact return fields (IDs, names, active/closed state, colors, creation dates). This provides clear expectations without needing an output 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word earns its place. It avoids fluff and directly states the scope and return fields.

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 simple: one optional parameter, no nested objects, no output schema. The description explains both the parameter behavior and return fields, making it complete for an agent to use without additional context.

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 schema already fully documents the single parameter with the description 'Filter by pipeline (omit for all statuses)' (100% coverage). The tool description adds minor redundancy by saying 'specific pipeline or all pipelines,' but it doesn't introduce new semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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's function: 'Get all statuses for a specific pipeline or all pipelines.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('statuses'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_pipeline' and 'get_pipelines' by explicitly mentioning the scope.

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 when to use the tool: whenever you need statuses for a pipeline or all pipelines. It also clarifies the optional parameter usage ('omit for all statuses'). No alternatives are mentioned, but no direct sibling offers the same functionality, so the context is clear.

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