get_jenkins_build

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the blocking behavior of wait=true and the output extraction from the job_output: marker. However, it does not explain the timeout_seconds parameter, what happens on timeout, or how errors/not-found builds are handled.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the core purpose in the first sentence, then provides the operational flow and return behavior in two more sentences. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 that an output schema exists and the sibling context is fairly narrow, the description covers the essential call flow, handle selection, blocking option, and return output meaning. The main gap is the unexplained timeout_seconds parameter and lack of error/timeout behavior details, which an agent may need to set wait correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for build_number, queue_url, and wait by explaining how they relate to the run_jenkins_action flow, but timeout_seconds is never mentioned or connected to the wait behavior, leaving one of four parameters semantically unexplained.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get the status and result of a Jenkins build.' It clearly positions this tool as the follow-up retrieval step after run_jenkins_action, which distinguishes it from the sibling tools for listing actions and fetching console output.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call it after run_jenkins_action with wait=false, and pass either build_number or queue_url depending on whether the build was queued. It also explains the wait=true blocking behavior, though it does not explicitly discuss when-not-to-use this tool versus the console-log sibling.

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