jenkins-http-mcp-server

jenkins_health

Read-only

Check Jenkins server health and version by retrieving a snapshot from top-level JSON and headers.

Instructions

Return a small health snapshot from top-level Jenkins JSON and version headers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv2.0.0Sep 6, 2026

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```

addedOutput schema / description

Added value: +"Structured content returned by successful Jenkins tools."

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "data": {
+    "title": "Data"
+  },
+  "ok": {
+    "const": true,
+    "title": "Ok",
+    "type": "boolean"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "ok",
+  "data"
+]
```

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"jenkins_healthDictOutput"New value: +"ToolSuccess"

First observedv0.1.0May 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the useful detail that data comes from top-level Jenkins JSON and version headers, which is consistent with annotations. No contradiction; it just does not disclose any additional behavioral nuances like rate limits or failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The entire description is one front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, the result, and the data source efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter read-only health snapshot with an output schema available, the description provides all necessary context: what it does and where the data comes from. Nothing critical is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to explain. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, this is fully adequate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Return') and names a concrete resource ('small health snapshot') with explicit data sources ('top-level Jenkins JSON and version headers'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like jenkins_version and jenkins_get_json, so an agent knows exactly what this tool produces.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as jenkins_get_json or jenkins_version. The phrase 'small health snapshot' implies a lightweight check, but no explicit context or exclusions are given, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria.

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

Deploy Server