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. It states 'delete' (destructive action) but doesn't disclose critical behaviors: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, required permissions, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, or what happens to associated resources. This is inadequate for a destructive mutation 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?

Single sentence, zero waste, front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place: 'Delete' (verb), 'multiple jobs' (resource/scope), 'in a single batch operation' (method).

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 with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (permanence, permissions, errors), usage guidelines vs siblings, and output expectations. The high schema coverage doesn't compensate for these gaps in a mutation tool.

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 the 'guids' parameter fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying 'multiple' jobs via 'batch', which is already clear from the schema's array type. Baseline 3 is appropriate when 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 ('Delete multiple jobs') and resource ('jobs'), specifying it's a batch operation. It distinguishes from the singular 'jpi_delete_job' sibling by mentioning 'multiple' and 'batch', but doesn't explicitly name the alternative or detail scope differences beyond batch vs single.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'jpi_delete_job' or 'jpi_delete_tasks_batch'. The description implies batch deletion but doesn't specify thresholds (e.g., 'use for >5 jobs') or prerequisites (e.g., 'jobs must be in a certain state').

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