Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Loadster

by com.loadster
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update Load Test Notes

update_load_test_notes
DestructiveIdempotent

Replace the notes on a finished Load Test's Test Report — the only thing on a Load Test this surface edits. Ask the user before writing: notes belong to the user, and advising on a test never requires writing them. The text sent becomes the report's entire notes, so first read the current notes with get_load_test_report and preserve the user's content in what you send.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "notes": "<notes>"
    },
    "name": "update_load_test_notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesYesThe full notes text to store on the Test Report, replacing whatever notes it already carries. At most 4096 characters; an empty string clears the notes.
testIdNoDeprecated alias of loadTestId; send loadTestId instead.
projectIdYes
loadTestIdNoThe load test id, as reported by list_load_tests. Required unless the deprecated testId is sent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / loadTestId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The load test id, as reported by list_load_tests. Required unless the deprecated testId is sent.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / testId / description
      Previous value: -"The load test id, as reported by list_load_tests."New value: +"Deprecated alias of loadTestId; send loadTestId instead."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "testId",
-  "notes"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "notes"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes further by naming exactly what is destroyed (the report's entire existing notes, full replace not append) and requiring a read-before-write plus user confirmation. That is precisely the context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, and the scope constraint plus the destructive replacement warning are front-loaded before the procedural advice. Every sentence carries a distinct rule.

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?

No output schema exists, but for a destructive mutation the description covers safety, prerequisite reads, replacement semantics, and user-consent policy — everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 75% and the notes parameter already documents replace semantics and the 4096-char/empty-string behavior. The description reinforces the replace-vs-append distinction and the preserve-content obligation, adding modest value; the deprecated testId alias is left to the schema, which is appropriate.

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 verb (replace) and resource (notes on a finished Load Test's Test Report), and explicitly bounds scope with 'the only thing on a Load Test this surface edits.' An agent can distinguish it from siblings like update_scenario or update_script without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use rules ('Ask the user before writing'), a when-not rationale ('advising on a test never requires writing them'), and names the prerequisite tool (get_load_test_report) to call first. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Loadster toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources