JPI MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, required permissions, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, or what happens to associated data. For a batch deletion tool with no annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 front-loads the core action ('Delete multiple Job Component References') and specifies the operation type ('in a single batch operation'). There's zero wasted language or redundancy.

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 destructive batch operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like permanence, permissions, or error handling, nor does it explain return values or success/failure responses. Given the complexity and risk of batch deletions, more context is needed.

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 clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying batch processing of JCR GUIDs. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the 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 clearly states the verb ('Delete') and resource ('multiple Job Component References'), specifying it's a batch operation. It distinguishes from the singular 'jpi_delete_jcr' sibling tool by mentioning 'multiple' and 'batch', but doesn't explicitly contrast with other deletion tools like 'jpi_delete_job' or 'jpi_delete_tasks_batch'.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when batch deletion is preferred over individual deletion, or any constraints. With many sibling deletion tools available, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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