convert_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 discloses the input type (Jenkinsfile content) and output type (equivalent workflow), and scopes to declarative pipeline syntax. However, it does not disclose limitations such as unsupported constructs, error handling, or whether the conversion is lossy, which are important for a conversion tool.

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 sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary purpose and adds the input/output relationship in the second sentence, making it concise and easy to parse.

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 simple tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it states the input, output, and scope. The schema covers parameter details, and the return value is clearly described as the equivalent workflow. No significant information is missing for invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; the 'format' parameter's purpose is only implied by the default output being YAML, but the schema already documents it. No additional parameter guidance is provided.

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 ('Convert') and clearly identifies the resource (Jenkinsfile declarative pipeline syntax) and target (GitHub Actions workflow YAML). It differentiates from the sibling tool 'analyze_jenkinsfile' by focusing on transformation rather than analysis.

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 clear context: use this tool when you have a Jenkinsfile and want a GitHub Actions workflow. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinct from the sibling, so no exclusions are needed.

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