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. It states this is a deletion operation (implying destructive), but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether deletions are permanent/reversible, authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling for invalid GUIDs, or what happens if the job doesn't exist. The description is minimal and lacks necessary operational context.

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 straightforward batch deletion tool and front-loads the key 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 destructive batch operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (success/failure indicators), error conditions, side effects, or important constraints. Given the complexity of batch deletions and lack of structured safety hints, more context is needed for safe and effective use.

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 'jobGuid' identifies the job and 'taskGuids' are the tasks to delete, which is already covered by the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when 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 ('Delete multiple tasks') and target ('from a job'), and specifies it's a batch operation. It distinguishes from the singular 'jpi_delete_task' sibling by mentioning 'multiple tasks' and 'batch operation', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'jpi_delete_tasks_cross_jobs' which might handle cross-job deletions.

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 like 'jpi_delete_task' (for single deletions) or 'jpi_delete_tasks_cross_jobs' (potentially for cross-job operations). It mentions it's for batch operations but doesn't specify prerequisites, constraints, or recommended scenarios.

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