jenkins-http-mcp-server

jenkins_trigger_build_with_parameters

Destructive

Trigger a parameterized Jenkins build by specifying the job and parameter values. Pass an optional delay to schedule the build start.

Instructions

Trigger a parameterized job build. Requires JENKINS_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=1.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job`	Yes
`delay`	No
`parameters`	Yes

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_trigger_build_with_parametersDictOutput"New value: +"ToolSuccess"

First observedv0.1.0May 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that the tool is non-readonly, non-idempotent, and destructive, so the safety profile is handled. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond annotations by disclosing the environment gate 'Requires JENKINS_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=1,' an operational precondition that will cause the call to fail if not satisfied.

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?

Two short sentences totaling roughly a dozen words, with the action front-loaded and the prerequisite in the second sentence. There is zero redundancy and every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Annotations cover the destructive write safety profile and an output schema exists, which lowers the bar for explaining return values. However, given 0% schema description coverage, a nested object parameter, and a sibling jenkins_trigger_build that needs differentiation, the description leaves parameter formatting and tool-selection decisions entirely to the agent.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carried the full burden of explaining the three parameters (job, parameters, delay), but it names none of them. The parameter names are self-evident enough to avoid a 1, yet the nested 'parameters' object shape and the string-or-array flexibility of 'job' are left completely unexplained.

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?

States a specific action verb ('trigger') and a specific resource ('a parameterized job build'), and the qualifier 'parameterized' distinguishes it from the closely related sibling jenkins_trigger_build. The action is unambiguous and tells an agent exactly what this tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description supplies a real prerequisite, 'Requires JENKINS_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=1,' which tells the agent the condition under which the call will succeed. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the sibling jenkins_trigger_build; that routing is only implied by the tool name rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server