Replai

Create test case

test_case_create

Retains question/rubric. Conversation origin is validated and derived by server.

No creation receipt exists. test_cases_list shows saved cases after loss; recreation risks duplicates.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	Saved test question, required and advisory conditions, and question origin.
`agent_id`	Yes	Agent ID from agents_list or agent_create.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`origin`	No
`question`	Yes
`created_at`	Yes
`evaluation`	No
`last_run_at`	No
`draft_answer`	No
`expectations`	No
`last_attempt`	No
`draft_revision`	No
`answer_freshness`	No
`published_answer`	No
`freshness_reasons`	No
`published_version`	No
`evaluation_current`	No
`evaluation_criteria`	No
`advisory_expectations`	No
`draft_source_versions`	No
`image_evidence_available`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description

Added value: +"Agent ID from agents_list or agent_create."

addedInput schema / properties / data / description

Added value: +"Saved test question, required and advisory conditions, and question origin."

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 30, 2026

addedOutput schema / $defs / FreshnessReason

Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "kind": {
+      "enum": [
+        "unrecorded",
+        "settings",
+        "source_added",
+        "source_removed",
+        "source_changed"
+      ],
+      "title": "Kind",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source_id": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Source Id"
+    },
+    "source_name": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Source Name"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "kind"
+  ],
+  "title": "FreshnessReason",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / answer_freshness

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "current",
+        "changed",
+        "unprovable"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Answer Freshness"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / freshness_reasons

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/FreshnessReason"
+  },
+  "title": "Freshness Reasons",
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses that no creation receipt exists, that conversation origin is validated and derived server-side, and that duplicate creation is risky after loss. These are meaningful operational details for a non-idempotent create tool.

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?

The description is very short and each sentence carries useful operational information. It is not perfectly front-loaded, since the first sentence is less direct than the tool title, but there is little waste.

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?

For a nested create tool, the description covers important loss/recreation behavior and origin handling, while the schema carries the field details and the output schema covers returns. Still, the sparse purpose statement leaves the overall workflow less complete than ideal.

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%, so the schema already documents the nested fields thoroughly. The description adds a small amount of meaning by pairing 'question/rubric' and noting server-derived origin, but it does not materially clarify the expectations parameters.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description never plainly says 'create a test case'; 'Retains question/rubric' only implies saving. It does mention server-side origin validation and links to test_cases_list, but the core action remains somewhat indirect.

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?

It gives a specific post-loss caveat: use test_cases_list to see saved cases because re-creation risks duplicates. However, it does not explicitly route between this tool and siblings such as test_case_edit, test_case_run, or test_case_evaluate.

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

All Replai tools Inspect

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

Need Help?