dts_list_pipelines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It goes beyond a simple list by defining 'verified: true' as confirmed by a successful real run and warns that unverified pipelines have unconfirmed input combinations and may require error-code iteration. This is valuable behavioral context that aids the agent's expectations.

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 sentences, both necessary. The first states the function and scope, the second explains the meaning of the verified flag. There is no filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys what the output contains (pipelines, flags, verified status) and explains the meaningful distinction between verified and unverified. It lacks an explicit return format but this is not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema trivially covers 100% of them. The description provides no parameter-specific details because there are none, matching the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters.

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 a specific verb ('List') and names the exact resource ('publish pipelines') plus the details provided (flags, verified status). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like dts_publish and dts_create_job, which perform actions rather than listing metadata.

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 the tool should be used to discover available pipelines and their verification status before creating a publish job, but it does not explicitly state 'use this when' or mention alternatives. The caveat about unverified pipelines and iterating on error codes offers context but no direct guidance on tool selection.

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