tuskr-mcp-server

Create Test Run

create_test_run

Create a test run in a project, adding all or selected test cases, with optional assignee and deadline.

Instructions

Creates a new test run in a project.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "project": "<project>",
      "test_case_inclusion_type": "<test_case_inclusion_type>"
    },
    "name": "create_test_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	a new test run name
`project`	Yes	name or project ID where to create a test run
`deadline`	No	YYYY-MM-DD date
`test_cases`	No	list of IDs, keys or names. Required if you have set `test_case_inclusion_type` to 'SPECIFIC'.
`assigned_to`	No	ID, name, or email of the user. If specified, the test run will be assigned to this user
`description`	No	description of a test run
`test_case_inclusion_type`	Yes	One of 'ALL' or 'SPECIFIC'. If you specify 'ALL', all test cases in the project will be included in the test run. If you specify 'SPECIFIC', then you will have to indicate the test cases to include as explained below.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed18 schema fields changedv0.1.5Oct 25, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / assigned_to / description

Added value: +"ID, name, or email of the user. If specified, the test run will be assigned to this user"

removedInput schema / properties / assigned_to / title
```
Removed value: -"Assigned To"
```
addedInput schema / properties / deadline / description
```
Added value: +"YYYY-MM-DD date"
```
removedInput schema / properties / deadline / title
```
Removed value: -"Deadline"
```
addedInput schema / properties / description / description
```
Added value: +"description of a test run"
```
removedInput schema / properties / description / title
```
Removed value: -"Description"
```
addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"a new test run name"
```
removedInput schema / properties / name / title
```
Removed value: -"Name"
```

addedInput schema / properties / project / description

Added value: +"name or project ID where to create a test run"

removedInput schema / properties / project / title
```
Removed value: -"Project"
```

addedInput schema / properties / test_case_inclusion_type / description

Added value: +"One of 'ALL' or 'SPECIFIC'. If you specify 'ALL', all test cases in the project will be included in the test run.\n                      If you specify 'SPECIFIC', then you will have to indicate the test cases to include as explained below."

removedInput schema / properties / test_case_inclusion_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Test Case Inclusion Type"
```

addedInput schema / properties / test_cases / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / test_cases / description

Added value: +"list of IDs, keys or names. Required if you have set `test_case_inclusion_type` to 'SPECIFIC'."

removedInput schema / properties / test_cases / items
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
removedInput schema / properties / test_cases / title
```
Removed value: -"Test Cases"
```
removedInput schema / properties / test_cases / type
```
Removed value: -"array"
```

First observedv0.1.2Jul 29, 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 of behavioral disclosure, and it states only that a record is created. It says nothing about side effects such as whether assigning a user triggers notifications, whether the run starts in an open/locked state, what happens with an empty test set, or whether creation is reversible.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded, with no filler. It is efficient but so minimal that it reads as under-specification rather than disciplined concision.

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

Completeness2/5

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

A 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema needs more: the return value (run ID or object?), failure modes for invalid project or test case names, and interaction between test_case_inclusion_type and test_cases are all left unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every one of the 7 parameters (including the ALL/SPECIFIC inclusion semantics and the deadline format) is already documented in the schema. Per the baseline rule, the description adding no parameter detail still lands at 3.

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?

Specific verb (creates) plus resource (test run) with the scoping location (in a project). It does not, however, distinguish this from siblings such as copy_test_run, upsert_test_case, or update_test_run, so an agent gets the action but not 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 guidance on when to prefer this over copy_test_run or update_test_run, and no prerequisites (project permissions, existing test cases, assignment rules). The single clause 'in a project' is the only contextual hint.

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

Deploy Server