jenkins_create_job

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states the action (create) but doesn't disclose what happens on failure, whether it requires authentication/session established, whether existing job with same name errors, or behavior of the 'folder' parameter when the folder doesn't exist. With zero annotations and a mutation tool, this is a notable gap.

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 reasonably concise with a one-line summary plus an Args block listing all four parameters. The Arg list is somewhat redundant with the schema but does add minor clarity. Could be tightened, but not verbose.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description should provide more. It doesn't mention the output schema content, error scenarios, whether the job can be overwritten, or how the session/folder interacts. Schema covers param names/types but not semantics. A fully self-describing tool would note overwrite behavior or validation of XML.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The Args section repeats parameter names with brief explanations (job_name, config_xml, folder, session_name), which adds minimal meaning. It clarifies folder means 'root level' when empty and session_name is a session selector, going slightly beyond schema. However, it doesn't explain what format config_xml expects or how folder paths are specified.

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?

Description uses specific verb+resource: 'Create a new Jenkins job from an XML configuration.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like jenkins_copy_job or jenkins_create_folder by specifying creation from XML config. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with related job tools (copy_job, update_job_config).

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 purpose implies it's for creating jobs, which is clear context. However, no explicit when/when-not guidance is given, and it doesn't distinguish from jenkins_copy_job or other job-creation-like operations. No prerequisites like needing a prior connection (jenkins_connect) are mentioned.

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