api-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Generate API test + edge cases

generate_tests

Generate comprehensive test plans covering happy-path, edge, negative, and security cases for all discovered API endpoints. Outputs tests.json without executing tests.

Instructions

Generates a test plan (happy-path, edge, negative, and security cases) for every discovered endpoint, based on its HTTP method and parameters. Writes tests.json. Does not execute anything.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "generate_tests"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Project root path.
`baseUrl`	No	Base URL of the running server, e.g. http://localhost:3000.
`headers`	No	Extra headers applied to every request. Supports ${ENV_VAR}.
`bearerToken`	No	Bearer token for Authorization header. Supports ${ENV_VAR}.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.11Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Discloses key behaviors: writes tests.json, does not execute, bases tests on HTTP method and parameters. However, does not mention if it overwrites existing files, or the need for prior endpoint discovery.

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 concise sentences, first states core purpose, second adds a key limitation. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, and description only mentions it writes tests.json. Does not explain return values, prerequisites (e.g., prior endpoint scan), or how endpoints are discovered.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions. Description does not add further meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clearly states it generates a test plan for every discovered endpoint, writes tests.json, and does not execute anything. Distinguishes from sibling tools like run_tests.

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?

Implied usage by specifying it works on discovered endpoints, but does not explicitly state when or when not to use it, nor mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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

Deploy Server