cst_runtime_list_pipelines_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but discloses almost nothing about behavior. It doesn't state that the operation is read-only, whether it has side effects, or any auth or rate limit requirements. 'List' implies safety, but that is not made explicit.

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 wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though its brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, the description does not clarify what 'runtime workflow recipes' are or how this tool relates to other runtime and toolbox siblings, leaving the agent with minimal context for selection.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to describe. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4 in this dimension.

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?

States a clear verb 'List' and resource 'runtime workflow recipes', distinguishing it from list tools for other objects. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like cst_runtime_list_tools_tool or cst_toolbox_list_pipelines_tool, leaving some ambiguity about 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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cst_runtime_list_tools_tool, cst_runtime_describe_tool, or cst_toolbox_list_pipelines_tool. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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