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 output format ('table format with status') and filtering capability, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly state whether it requires authentication, uses cached data, or has side effects. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but not richly transparent.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no redundant fluff. Every phrase 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, a single optional filter parameter, and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and output format. It lacks explicit usage guidance relative to siblings, but for a list-all-with-filter tool, it is reasonably complete.

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 schema already fully describes the 'filter' parameter, and the description only repeats 'Supports filtering by name' without adding additional semantics. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies; the description adds no extra value beyond the schema.

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's action ('List all available Jenkins jobs'), the resource (Jenkins jobs), and the output format ('table format with status'). It also mentions filtering, which distinguishes it from more specific tools like job_details or refresh_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 implies usage for viewing all jobs but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like job_details or refresh_jobs. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are given, leaving the agent to infer from the sibling names.

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