mcp-xray

xray_graphql

Execute GraphQL queries against Xray Cloud API to fetch advanced test data such as test runs, steps, preconditions, and test sets.

Instructions

Executes a GraphQL query against Xray Cloud. Only available for cloud deployments. Use this for advanced Xray-specific queries like fetching test runs, test steps, preconditions, or test sets.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "xray_graphql"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	GraphQL query string to execute against the Xray Cloud API.
`variables`	No	Variables for the GraphQL query.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the cloud-deployment restriction but does not state whether mutations are allowed, how auth works, what errors or response shape to expect, or any rate limits. This is a significant gap for an arbitrary GraphQL executor.

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?

The description is two sentences with the action and constraint front-loaded, followed by concrete usage examples. Every word earns its place and there is no redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, and a critical environment constraint (cloud-only), but given the tool's complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, it omits important behavioral details such as response format, error handling, and mutation safety. It is adequate for selection but not fully complete.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds context about intended query content but not additional parameter-level syntax or variable formatting; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Executes') and resource ('GraphQL query against Xray Cloud'), then lists concrete use cases (test runs, test steps, preconditions, test sets). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools, which target specific Xray endpoints or operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit instruction: 'Use this for advanced Xray-specific queries like...' which tells when to choose this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like the sibling CRUD tools, so it lacks full exclusions.

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

Deploy Server