jenkins_list_jobs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields (name, type, color/status, URL) which is genuinely useful, but doesn't mention whether listing requires an active session, what happens on connection failure, or error behavior. For a read-only list operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Compact and front-loaded. The core purpose is stated in the opening sentence, the return fields in one sentence, and parameters in a concise Args block. No wasted words or redundant restatement of the schema defaults.

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?

Has an output schema, so return format is covered elsewhere. For a 2-parameter list tool with no required params, this description covers the essentials: scope, return fields, and parameter semantics. Could mention session requirements or pagination limits, but for a straightforward listing tool this is complete enough.

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%, but the description explicitly documents both parameters (folder and session_name with defaults). The folder semantics (empty = root) and session_name default are explained directly. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions, though it could add format details like whether folder uses forward slashes or dots.

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 clearly states the tool lists Jenkins jobs, optionally within a specific folder, and shows job name, type, color/status, and URL. This is a specific verb+resource+scope combination that distinguishes it from siblings like jenkins_get_job or jenkins_list_folder_jobs.

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 clarifies the folder parameter supports scoping to a subfolder (empty = root level), which provides context on when to use folder. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the distinction from jenkins_list_folder_jobs and jenkins_get_job is clear enough from the purpose statement.

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