Skip to main content
Glama

TestChimp

by io.testchimp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Mark Plan Items Implementation Done

mark-plan-items-implementation-done
Idempotent

Mark user stories and/or test scenarios implementation-complete in platform lifecycle (DB only; does not rewrite plan markdown). Use scenarioOrdinalIds / userStoryOrdinalIds (numeric parts of TS- / US-).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
botIdNoQA bots: your botId from your stored TestChimp binding.
projectApiKeyNoQA bots: your own project API key from your stored TestChimp binding. Required on every call except get-bot-credentials, get-project-credentials and get-bot-compat. Never print it.
scenarioOrdinalIdsNo
userStoryOrdinalIdsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / botId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "QA bots: your botId from your stored TestChimp binding.",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectApiKey
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "QA bots: your own project API key from your stored TestChimp binding. Required on every call except get-bot-credentials, get-project-credentials and get-bot-compat. Never print it.",
+  "maxLength": 256,
+  "minLength": 8,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

"DB only; does not rewrite plan markdown" is a genuine side-effect disclosure that goes beyond what the annotations already declare (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It tells the agent exactly what state changes and, importantly, what does NOT change. It stops short of covering failure semantics for invalid ordinal IDs.

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 sentences, no filler, and the core action plus its DB-only constraint is front-loaded before the parameter hint. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a low-complexity mutation tool with annotations covering idempotency and non-destructiveness, the description covers the action, the persistence boundary, and parameter encoding. Remaining gaps (invalid-ID behavior, whether partial success is possible) are minor since no output schema exists and the annotations carry the safety profile.

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 description coverage is only 50% (scenarioOrdinalIds and userStoryOrdinalIds have no schema descriptions), so the description must compensate — and it does, explaining that these arrays hold the numeric parts of TS-<n> / US-<n> identifiers. That is real added meaning over an unannotated integer array.

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?

States a specific verb (mark implementation-complete) and resource (user stories / test scenarios) with scope clarification that it affects the platform lifecycle DB only. It does not, however, name or differentiate itself from the very similar sibling update-plan-items-lifecycle-status, leaving an agent to infer the boundary.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description never mentions the closely related update-plan-items-lifecycle-status sibling or states the condition that selects this tool over it, so an agent has no explicit routing signal beyond the tool name itself.

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

All TestChimp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources