Jenkins MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Node Health

node_health

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check Jenkins controller and static agent health, including online/offline reasons, labels, executors, disk, memory, response time, and clock drift, with optional problem-only filtering.

Instructions

Controller and agent status: online/offline (with reason), labels, executors, idle, free disk and temp space, free memory/swap, response time, clock drift, plus warnings. Static agents only; ephemeral Kubernetes agents appear only while they exist. Details of one node: get_node.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "node_health"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`instance`	No	Jenkins instance name from list_instances. Empty = default instance.
`only_problems`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent, so the bar is lower, but the description still adds meaningful behavior: the ephemeral-Kubernetes visibility caveat explains why a node may be missing from results, which no annotation conveys. It doesn't discuss cost, pagination, or how failures surface as 'warnings', but with an output schema present the field inventory need not be elaborated further.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences: payload inventory first, scope caveat second, sibling routing last. Every clause carries information, and the most decision-relevant content (what it returns, what it excludes) is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema, the definition covers purpose, scope, and the detail-level alternative adequately. The one real hole is the undocumented 'only_problems' filter, which an agent would have to infer from the name alone.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%: 'instance' is documented in the schema, but 'only_problems' has no description anywhere. The prose says nothing about either parameter — not what a filter looks like, not that 'only_problems' narrows the listing — so it does not compensate for the coverage gap on a flag that materially changes the output.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the specific resource (controller and agent status) and enumerates exactly which signals are returned: online/offline with reason, labels, executors, idle state, disk/temp/memory/swap, response time, clock drift, warnings. It also explicitly routes detail-level lookups to the sibling get_node, so an agent can distinguish it from that tool without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Static agents only; ephemeral Kubernetes agents appear only while they exist' states a real scope constraint and its consequence. 'Details of one node: get_node' names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing to inference.

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