analyze_jenkinsfile

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 clearly states the tool provides structural information, implying a read-only operation, but it does not disclose error behavior, validation requirements, or any potential side effects. The description adds some context by listing output categories but lacks deep behavioral detail.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output scope, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 single-parameter analysis tool without an output schema, the description lists the key output categories (stages, steps, environment variables, agent configuration) and the input. It lacks explicit detail on return format or edge cases, but is largely complete for its simple scope, making it more than minimally viable.

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 single parameter 'jenkinsfile' with 100% coverage, including its type and description. The tool description does not add extra parameter details beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Analyze' with resource 'Jenkinsfile' and lists the output components (stages, steps, environment variables, agent configuration). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'convert_jenkinsfile' by focusing on structural analysis rather than transformation.

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 when an agent needs to inspect a Jenkinsfile's structure, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of 'convert_jenkinsfile' or provide any exclusions. It lacks explicit alternative guidance, so the usage context is clear only through implication.

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