xray_search_test_plans

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses that the issuetype filter is applied automatically and gives an example. However, it does not cover other behavioral aspects such as pagination, return format, authentication needs, or the read-only nature of the operation, which would be valuable for a search tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every part earns its place. It includes a practical example without bloat.

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

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

Given no annotation and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, parameter usage, and an example. It does not describe the return value shape, which would be helpful for an agent, but the tool's simplicity and good param descriptions keep it mostly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the intended use of key parameters ('projectKey' filtering by project, 'jql' for additional conditions, 'orderBy' for sorting) and provides a concrete example, going beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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

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

The description states a specific action ('Searches'), a specific resource ('Test Plan issues in Jira'), and the mechanism ('using filters'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tool xray_search_test_executions by focusing on Test Plans. The automatic issuetype filter is mentioned, adding specificity.

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

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

Provides explicit guidance on key parameters ('projectKey', 'jql', 'orderBy') and a concrete example. It implies when to use this tool (for Test Plan searches) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like xray_search_test_executions or xray_get_test_plan, nor does it state when not to use it.

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