kiwi_create_test_case

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states the tool creates a case and returns the created case, which conveys persistence and return behavior. It does not mention validation failures, permissions, or duplicate handling, but for a create operation this is adequate.

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?

Two compact sentences with the most important constraint at the beginning. The required-field list is organized clearly, and the optional fields are grouped without redundancy.

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?

For a single nested-object parameter with no annotations or output schema, the description provides the essential required fields, optional fields, and return behavior. It could also point to lookup tools like kiwi_get_categories or kiwi_get_priorities for resolving IDs, but the definition is usable as-is.

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?

The schema only says values is a field dict passed to TestCase.create. The description adds real value by listing required keys with aliases and several optional keys, substantially clarifying what belongs inside the opaque values object.

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?

Starts with 'Create a test case' — a specific verb and resource. The required/optional field list makes it clear this creates a new test case and not a plan, run, or update operation.

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?

The verb 'create' implies this tool is for new test cases, and the sibling list includes update/delete variants. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over kiwi_update_test_case or kiwi_delete_test_case, leaving some routing to inference.

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