Manage Pipeline

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

The description reveals that the tool requires write permissions and implies side effects (since it's not read-only). Annotations are non-contradictory but sparse; the description adds context about authentication but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like what happens to pipeline data or potential rate limits.

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 that precisely conveys the tool's purpose and a key requirement. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (4 parameters, no output schema) and high schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention constraints like retry only applies to failed pipelines or cancel only to running 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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter described well. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retries or cancels a CI/CD pipeline, using specific verbs ('Retry or cancel') and a specific resource ('CI/CD pipeline'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_merge_request_pipelines (read-only) by explicitly mentioning actions.

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 includes a prerequisite ('requires user authentication with write permissions'), which helps an agent determine when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for similar actions.

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