set_item_config

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, confirming this is a write operation. The description adds 'Set', which aligns. However, it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like idempotency, error handling for missing items, or side effects beyond the annotation.

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 short sentence, but it omits necessary details. Conciseness is good, but at the expense of clarity and completeness.

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 the absence of output schema, no parameter descriptions, and only two params, the description should explain what 'set config' entails (e.g., replaces configuration, requires XML). It does not, leaving informational gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage and the description provides no explanation of the two parameters (fullname, config_xml). The agent must infer their meanings from names alone; e.g., config_xml might be XML, but format, required structure, or relationship to fullname is unstated.

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 states 'Set specific item config in Jenkins', which clearly indicates the verb (Set) and resource (item config). It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_item_config' (get vs set), but lacks explicit differentiation or scope details like 'replaces entire XML config'.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., get_item_config for reading, build_item for building). No prerequisites, caveats, or when-not-to-use advice provided.

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