Testiny Test Management

Add a comment to the result for a test case in a test run

addTestResultComment

Adds a comment to the result for a test case in a test run, the test case must already be part of the test run

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`format`	No	Format for rich-text fields (descriptions, preconditions, comments, step & result cells, stepsText & expectedResultText) on both input and output: 'markdown' (default) or 'xml'. Read the matching rich-text format reference resource before producing either. Use 'xml' for BOTH the read and the write whenever you are changing a field that already has content: markdown cannot carry an underline or a text color, so an edit written as markdown writes those away. 'markdown' is for writing new content and for reading you will not edit.
`project`	Yes	Project ID (number or string), project key or part of the project name
`testRunId`	Yes	The id of the test run
`testCaseId`	Yes	The id of the test case in the test run to add the comment to
`commentText`	Yes	The comment text - rich text in the chosen 'format'

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / commentText / description

Previous value: -"The comment text - can include simple markdown elements"New value: +"The comment text - rich text in the chosen 'format'"

changedInput schema / properties / commentText / maxLength
```
Previous value: -32000New value: +16000
```

addedInput schema / properties / format

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Format for rich-text fields (descriptions, preconditions, comments, step & result cells, stepsText & expectedResultText) on both input and output: 'markdown' (default) or 'xml'. Read the matching rich-text format reference resource before producing either. Use 'xml' for BOTH the read and the write whenever you are changing a field that already has content: markdown cannot carry an underline or a text color, so an edit written as markdown writes those away. 'markdown' is for writing new content and for reading you will not edit.",
+  "enum": [
+    "markdown",
+    "xml"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a write (readOnlyHint=false), non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds a real behavioral constraint beyond them: the test case must already belong to the test run, i.e. the failure mode for an unprepared target. It says nothing about permissions, whether a duplicate comment is appended each call, or the rich-text format caveats that drive the 'format' parameter.

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 that carries the purpose and the precondition with no filler. It is tightly sized, though it is essentially the title plus one clause, so it does not demonstrate extra structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the schema fully documents the five parameters. For a simple single-comment write, purpose plus the precondition is close to sufficient; only the behavior on repeated calls and permission needs are left implicit.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and every parameter, including the nuanced markdown/xml 'format' enum, is documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Adds a comment to the result for a test case in a test run'), so an agent knows exactly what the tool creates and where it attaches. It does not differentiate itself from any sibling, but no sibling overlaps with commenting, so ambiguity risk is low.

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 gives one precondition ('the test case must already be part of the test run'), which implies when the call will succeed, but says nothing about when to reach for this tool versus setTestResult or setTestResultBatch. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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

All Testiny Test Management tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?