JPI MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Create' implies a write operation, it doesn't specify required permissions, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on failure, or what the response contains. For a mutation tool with 9 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a creation tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 job creation tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the relationship between tasks and the job, what happens after creation, error conditions, or how this differs from batch creation. The minimal description leaves too many contextual questions unanswered.

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 schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'tasks and scheduling information' which aligns with the Tasks, Strategy, DueDate, and ReleaseDate parameters, but doesn't provide additional context beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 ('Create a new job') and specifies what it creates ('with tasks and scheduling information'), which distinguishes it from simpler job creation tools. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'jpi_create_jobs_batch' or 'jpi_update_job', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools including batch creation (jpi_create_jobs_batch), job updates (jpi_update_job), and task management tools, there's no indication of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions for this single-job creation tool.

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