pipedrive_list_pipelines

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds the important behavioral detail of cursor-based pagination, which is not captured in annotations. It also notes that pipelines contain stages, providing context. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two short, informative sentences with no extraneous words. The first sentence states the core action and pagination; the second adds useful context about pipelines. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. It explains pagination and pipeline structure but does not mention the response format, default sorting, or field details. Given the tool's low complexity and rich annotations, it meets minimum standards.

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 parameters (cursor, limit) are already well-documented. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema. 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?

Clearly states it lists sales pipelines with cursor pagination. The verb 'list' and resource 'sales pipelines' are specific, and the mention of pagination adds precision. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like pipedrive_list_deals or pipedrive_list_phases, beyond the resource name.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or scenarios where other tools would be more appropriate. The description is purely declarative.

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