get_build

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states it retrieves build info but does not explicitly confirm the operation is read-only, mention any side effects, or discuss prerequisites like authentication. The output schema exists but the description should add context about system impact.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, parameter descriptions in Args, and return indication. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every sentence is necessary, with no filler words.

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 simple retrieval tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter behaviors. However, in the context of many similar get_* siblings, it could improve by specifying that it returns metadata (not logs or artifacts) and mentioning that the job must exist.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must clarify meaning. It explains 'fullname' as the job's full name and 'number' as the build number with a conditional default ('if None, get the last build'). This adds significant semantic value beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with 'specific build info from Jenkins', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve artifacts, console output, or build parameters. It immediately communicates the resource and action.

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 explains the fallback behavior for the 'number' parameter (if None, get the last build), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_build_artifact or get_build_console_output. The usage context is implied but not contrasted with siblings.

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