List available post-install Ansible tasks with applicability tags (gpu, bm, vm, vgpu, default). Provide a token to see tasks available to a specific user.
Доступные post-install Ansible-задачи (jenkins/get_tasks) с тегами применимости: gpu, bm, vm, vgpu, default. Без токена — общий список, с токеном — доступные конкретному пользователю.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is safe and non-destructive. The description adds the nuance of token-based filtering, which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it does not detail pagination or response format, but that is acceptable for a read-only listing 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?
The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediately explains the key behavioral difference based on token presence. Every word adds value with no waste.
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?
Given that this is a read-only listing tool with no parameters, the description adequately covers what the agent needs: what it returns, the tags, and the token behavior. No output schema is present, but the description implies a list of tasks, which is sufficient for this simple 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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially 100% covered. The description adds semantic meaning about the token's role in filtering results, which is not visible in the schema. This compensates for the lack of parameter details.
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 tool's purpose: listing post-install Ansible tasks with applicability tags (gpu, bm, vm, vgpu, default). It also explains the difference between authenticated and unauthenticated access, distinguishing it from sibling tools like run_post_install_task.
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 mentions that without a token the general list is returned, and with a token the list available to the user is returned, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. It gives context but not explicit when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.