get_node_config

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates safe read-only behavior, so the description's disclosure of 'Get node config' is consistent but adds no behavioral depth beyond the annotation. No mention of response size, permissions, or error handling.

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. No wasted words, though it could be expanded slightly without losing efficiency.

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 tool with one parameter, the description is minimal. Lacks explanation of return format or content (e.g., configuration as XML/text). Better suited for ambiguous use cases where more detail would help.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters but fails to do so. The single required parameter 'name' is not explained beyond the schema; the description should specify it's the Jenkins node name.

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 'Get node config' from 'Jenkins', matching the tool name. It is distinct from siblings like 'get_node' (likely returns node info) and 'set_node_config' (write operation), but could further specify what 'config' entails.

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. For instance, it doesn't mention using 'get_node' for node status or 'set_node_config' for modifications, leaving the agent to infer without context.

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