bb_list_pipelines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'shows build status, trigger, and duration' but does not mention that the operation is read-only, that results are paginated, or any other behavioral traits like default limits or authentication requirements.

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 concise sentences that immediately state the main purpose and then add a brief detail about the output. Every word earns its place with no fluff or redundancy.

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 6-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description provides the core purpose and some output fields, but it omits important context such as pagination behavior, default page size, and whether all runs are returned. The schema covers parameters, but the description is not fully self-sufficient for a tool with this complexity.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including page, pagelen, and filter. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'CI/CD pipeline runs', clearly scoped to 'a repository'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bb_get_pipeline (which retrieves a single pipeline) and bb_get_pipeline_steps.

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 use when listing pipeline runs, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like bb_get_pipeline or mention any exclusions. No alternative tools are referenced, so guidance is only implied by the action itself.

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