JPI MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it's a batch operation without disclosing behavioral traits like whether it's idempotent, requires specific permissions, returns task IDs, or handles errors. 'Add' implies mutation, but no details on side effects, rate limits, or response format are provided.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste—front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral context (e.g., error handling, permissions), output expectations, and differentiation from siblings, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to infer correct usage.

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%, with both parameters ('jobGuid' and 'tasks') documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'tasks' is an array and 'jobGuid' identifies the target job, matching the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Add multiple tasks') and target resource ('to a job'), specifying it's a batch operation. It distinguishes from single-task operations like 'jpi_add_task' by emphasizing 'multiple tasks' and 'batch operation', though it doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'jpi_add_task' (for single tasks) or 'jpi_create_tasks_cross_jobs' (for cross-job creation). The description implies batch efficiency but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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