jenkins_get_build_artifacts

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or what happens on missing inputs. The description only states what it does, not its effects or constraints.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified and not particularly clear. A well-structured description should front-load the key purpose, which it does, but the sentence structure is awkward.

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 tool has 2 required parameters, no annotations, and no param descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value (despite an output schema existing) or edge cases. The tool is simple, but the description still falls short.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters 'job' and 'build'. It does not explain acceptable formats (e.g., job name vs. URL-encoded path) or the difference between string and array for job. The description provides no value beyond the raw schema.

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 (list) and resource (artifacts on a build), but the phrasing 'exported on a build JSON API response' is somewhat awkward. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like jenkins_get_build or jenkins_get_build_log, though not explicitly.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or context for usage. The description is purely functional without any decision cues.

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