MCP Jenkins

Get Queue Item

get_queue_item

Retrieve a Jenkins queue item by ID to inspect its status and details, helping you track pending builds.

Instructions

Get a specific item in Jenkins queue by id

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_queue_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The id of the queue item

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.6.0+microtech.5Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses almost nothing. 'Get' implies a read-only, non-destructive call, but there is no statement about behavior when the id does not exist, queue item states (pending/cancelled), or any authentication requirement. For a zero-annotation tool this is a significant gap, though the narrow one-parameter shape limits the risk.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool, though its terseness means it earns no extra credit beyond efficiency.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the tool is simple with one required parameter. Still, the definition is silent on failure behavior for an unknown id and on how a queue item id is obtained, which an agent needs in practice.

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

Parameters3/5

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

With one parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema already fully documents 'id'. The description restates the id lookup but adds no format or sourcing detail (e.g. that the id is the numeric queue id, not a job name), so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('a specific item in Jenkins queue') with an explicit lookup key ('by id'). This is clearly distinguishable from get_all_queue_items, though it never names that sibling explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance beyond the implied 'you need an id'. The description never says where the id comes from (get_all_queue_items), nor when to prefer get_all_queue_items or get_item instead, leaving routing entirely to inference.

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