jenkins_list_nodes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates this is a read-only operation (safe to call), which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose whether it requires an established session, what happens on connection failure, rate limits, or the output structure beyond naming fields. For a straightforward read-only listing tool, the basic safety transparency is adequate.

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 extremely concise at roughly three sentences, with zero filler. It states the purpose, lists the returned fields, and documents the one parameter. 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?

There is an output schema present, so the return format is covered. The tool is a straightforward read-only list operation with a single parameter, so the complexity is low. The description covers what it lists and the parameter. However, it doesn't mention session prerequisites or behavior differences from similar node-listing tools, leaving minor gaps for a tool of this 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The description mentions 'session_name: Jenkins session to use' in the Args section, which adds a small amount of context (that a session is needed). However, with only 1 param having a default value of 'default', the schema already conveys most needed info. The description adds minimal value beyond what the parameter name suggests.

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 'List all Jenkins nodes/agents with their status' with a specific verb (List) and resource (Jenkins nodes/agents). It distinguishes from sibling 'jenkins_get_node_info' by explicitly listing 'all' nodes and the fields shown (name, status, executors, labels). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the get_node_info sibling.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like jenkins_get_node_info, jenkins_get_executor_status, or jenkins_system_info. The description implies usage context ('list all nodes') but provides no exclusions or alternative pointers, relying on the agent to infer based on tool names.

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