get-pipeline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not burdened with proving safety. It adds useful context by specifying the exact endpoint and the required sales:read scope, which helps the agent understand access 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the operation, the resource, the endpoint, and the required scope efficiently.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter read operation, and the schema plus annotations cover most of what the agent needs. The description adds endpoint and scope, and notes that stages are included; a full return-shape description is not essential here.

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 100% and the 'id' parameter is already documented as 'Pipeline id.' The description does not add any additional meaning or format details for the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 names a specific verb ('Fetch'), a specific resource ('a sales pipeline'), and a distinguishing detail ('with stages'). The endpoint and scope provide enough detail to separate it from list-pipelines and get-default-pipeline.

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 makes the core use case clear: fetch one pipeline by id. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over list-pipelines or get-default-pipeline, leaving differentiation to inference.

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