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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states a generic list operation, omitting details like pagination defaults, read-only nature, rate limits, or any side effects. For a tool with 12 parameters, more behavioral context is needed.

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 sentence of 5 words, extremely concise with no unnecessary information. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

With 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-informative. It fails to mention pagination, filtering behavior, default ordering, or that it returns a list of pipeline objects. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the overall purpose; it does not explain how filters combine or default behaviors. The schema already documents each parameter adequately.

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 explicitly states 'List pipelines for a GitLab project', specifying the verb (list), resource (pipelines), and context (GitLab project). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_pipeline, cancel_pipeline, or other list tools.

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 usage when listing pipelines is needed, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_pipeline for single pipeline details) or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative recommendations are given.

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