jenkins_cancel_quiet_down

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the functional effect on queued builds, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention whether the tool is idempotent, what happens if quiet-down wasn't active, or any failure states.

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?

Extremely concise - two short sentences covering purpose and effect, plus a brief Args section. No wasted words, information front-loaded in the first sentence.

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?

There is an output schema available, and the tool is a simple state-change operation with one well-defined parameter. However, for a mutation-style operation with zero annotations, it would benefit from noting prerequisites (e.g., whether a prior quiet-down must exist) and idempotency characteristics.

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 single parameter session_name has 0% schema description coverage, but the description includes an 'Args' section explaining it is the 'Jenkins session to use.' The description meaningfully compensates for the schema gap since there's only one obvious parameter and it's clearly defined.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Cancel quiet-down mode and resume normal operations.' It states the action and outcome. Doesn't explicitly distinguish from its sibling jenkins_quiet_down, but the inverse relationship is strongly implied by 'cancel quiet-down.'

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?

Describes the effect ('Queued builds will begin processing again') which gives some context on when this is useful, but doesn't explicitly name the alternative (jenkins_quiet_down) or state when NOT to use it. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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