Skip to main content
Glama
SmartBear

SmartBear MCP server

Official
by SmartBear

Zephyr: Update Test Execution

zephyr_update_test_execution
Idempotent

Update an existing Zephyr test execution by modifying only specified fields like status, environment, or assignee, leaving others unchanged.

Instructions

Update an existing Test Execution in Zephyr. This operation only updates specified fields in the payload and ignores null or undefined values.

Toolset: Test Executions

Examples:

  1. Update the status name to 'PASS' and the environment name to 'ENV-1' in the test execution 'SA-E40'.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E40",
  "statusName": "PASS",
  "environmentName": "ENV-1"
}

Expected Output: The test execution should be updated, but no output is expected.

  1. Update execution time and actual end date for test execution id '1' (keep everything else unchanged).

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "1",
  "executionTime": "2018-05-19T13:15:13Z",
  "actualEndDate": "2018-05-20T13:15:13Z"
}

Expected Output: The test execution should be updated, but no output is expected.

  1. For test execution 'SA-E40', update the test executor and assignee to be the user with ID 10000.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E40",
  "executedById": "10000",
  "assignedToId": "10000"
}

Expected Output: The test execution should be updated, but no output is expected.

  1. In test execution 'SA-E40', add a comment saying that this execution was updated via API.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E40",
  "comment": "execution updated via API"
}

Expected Output: The test execution should be updated, but no output is expected.

  1. Remove the assigned user from test execution 'SA-E40'.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E40",
  "assignedToId": null
}

Expected Output: The test execution should be updated, but no output is expected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commentNoComment added against overall test case execution.
statusNameNoThe status name.
assignedToIdNoAtlassian Account ID of the Jira user.
executedByIdNoAtlassian Account ID of the Jira user.
actualEndDateNoThe actual end date of the test cycle. Format: yyyy-MM-dd'T'HH:mm:ss'Z'
executionTimeNoActual test execution time in milliseconds.
environmentNameNoEnvironment assigned to the test case.
testExecutionIdOrKeyYesThe ID or key of the test execution. Test execution keys are of the format [A-Z]+-E[0-9]+
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait that only specified fields are updated and null/undefined values are ignored, which complements the annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It also notes in examples that 'no output is expected', adding value beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core sentence and toolset label, followed by five detailed examples. While the examples are helpful, they add length; however, they are well-structured and don't contain fluff. The description earns its place for clarity.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers the operation's behavior (partial update, null handling) and provides examples for common use cases. It notes no output is expected. It lacks error scenarios or prerequisites, but given the schema coverage and annotations, it is sufficiently complete for an update tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the description adds minimal new meaning. The examples demonstrate parameter combinations, but the core semantics are already in the schema. 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Update an existing Test Execution in Zephyr.' It specifies the partial update behavior ('only updates specified fields') and is differentiated from siblings by the resource type (Test Execution) in both name and description. The examples further clarify the scope.

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?

The description provides examples of when to use the tool (updating status, environment, time, assignee, comment) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like create or get. The partial update behavior is implied but not contrasted with full replacement.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SmartBear/smartbear-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server