get-pipeline

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

No annotations are present, and the description is minimal, offering no information about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or response structure. The agent cannot infer behavioral traits beyond the basic read operation implied by 'Get'.

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 appropriately short (four words) and front-loaded with the purpose. While compact, it sacrifices detail, but for a simple get operation this is acceptable as core intent is clear.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and a moderate parameter count, the description is insufficient. It omits how results are returned, what 'include' values do, and how 'extractFields' modifies output, leaving agents without full context for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 75%, but the description adds no parameter-specific context beyond the schema. The 'include' and 'extractFields' parameters lack explanation in the description, forcing reliance on the schema alone.

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 'Get pipeline details by UUID' clearly states the action (get), resource (pipeline details), and identifier method (by UUID). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get-pipeline-by-name and list-pipelines.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get-pipeline-by-name or list-pipelines. No criteria, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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