jenkins_update_job_config

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a replacement operation but does not clarify whether the job must exist, if validation is performed, or if a build is triggered. This is insufficient for an updating tool.

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 concise at two sentences with no redundant information. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail, but it is not verbose.

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's complexity (mutating a job config) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits error conditions, idempotency, and output behavior. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 beyond the parameter names. It does not explain what format `job` should take (name vs path) or how `config_xml` should be structured (full XML, content type).

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 'Replace job config.xml', which is a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling `jenkins_get_job_config` by indicating an update operation, but does not explicitly contrast with other mutation tools like `jenkins_create_job`.

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?

It mentions required flags 'write and job-config', which provides key prerequisites. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., create vs update), leaving the agent without contextual guidance.

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