jenkins_quiet_down

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 does disclose the key behavioral trait: running builds continue but no new builds are queued. However, it doesn't mention whether this is reversible, what the response looks like, or whether it's idempotent (recalling when already in quiet-down). For a state-changing server operation, some additional context would help.

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 efficient and well-structured. It opens with the main action, clarifies the key behavioral nuance in one sentence, provides usage context, and documents the single parameter. No wasted words.

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 state-changing server operation with only one optional parameter and no complex schema, the description is reasonably complete. The behavior ('running builds continue, no new builds queued') is clearly stated. The use case ('before maintenance or restart') is given. An output schema exists but the description doesn't need to explain return values per the rubric. Could mention reversibility (via jenkins_cancel_quiet_down) but this is a minor gap.

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%, and the description lists 'session_name: Jenkins session to use' but adds little meaning beyond the schema. The schema already declares session_name as a string with a 'default' value. The description says 'Jenkins session to use' which is only marginally more informative—it doesn't clarify what a session is, how it relates to jenkins_connect/disconnect, or whether it's the session identifier from a prior connection.

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 puts Jenkins into quiet-down mode and explains what that means operationally ('no new builds will be started'). It uses a specific verb+resource construction that is clear. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling jenkins_cancel_quiet_down or jenkins_restart, though the meaning is implicit enough given the descriptive text.

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 provides a clear when-to-use context: 'Useful before maintenance or restart.' This is good usage guidance for selecting this tool. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when NOT to use it, but the maintenance/restart context is clear and differentiates from normal operations.

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