Update a test case by providing its ID and a partial set of fields to modify, such as summary, text, or status. Specify only the fields that need to change.
Update one test case. values is a partial field dict (e.g. {"summary": "...", "text": "...", "case_status_id": 2}).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| values | Yes | ||
| case_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds meaningful context by explaining that `values` is a partial field dict, implying partial updates rather than full replacement. However, it omits details such as required permissions, error behavior, and whether the operation is idempotent.
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?
One concise sentence with a leading action, a clear parameter explanation, and an illustrative example. No filler or 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?
Covers the essential invocation: which case to update and how to provide partial field values. However, with no output schema and no annotations, key contextual information like return value, error handling, and valid field names is missing, so it is not fully 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clearly explains `values` as a partial field dict with concrete examples, which adds real meaning beyond the bare schema. `case_id` is self-explanatory as an integer identifier.
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?
States a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('one test case'), making the tool's purpose clear. The singular phrasing distinguishes it from the sibling kiwi_update_test_cases without ambiguity.
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 phrase 'one test case' clearly signals this is for single-case updates, implying the plural sibling is for bulk updates. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.