Skip to main content
Glama
SmartBear

SmartBear MCP server

Official
by SmartBear
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Zephyr: Update Test Execution Steps

zephyr_update_test_execution_steps
Idempotent

Update status and actual results of test execution steps in Zephyr. Only specified fields are modified.

Instructions

Update test steps for a given Test Execution in Zephyr. This operation updates the provided steps with their execution status and actual results. Only the fields included in the request will be modified.

Toolset: Test Executions

Examples:

  1. Mark the status of all steps in the test execution 'SA-E1' as 'Pass'. Set the actual result of step 1 to 'Dashboard widgets loaded correctly' and step 2 to 'Navigation menu responded correctly to user interactions'.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E1",
  "steps": [
    {
      "statusName": "Pass",
      "actualResult": "Dashboard widgets loaded correctly"
    },
    {
      "statusName": "Pass",
      "actualResult": "Navigation menu responded correctly to user interactions"
    }
  ]
}

Expected Output: Test steps are updated successfully, but no output is expected.

  1. Update only the status of step 2 in test execution 'SA-E5' to 'Fail'. Do not modify any other fields.

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "SA-E5",
  "steps": [
    {},
    {
      "statusName": "Fail"
    }
  ]
}

Expected Output: The test execution steps are updated, but no output is expected.

  1. Update only the actual results of the steps in test execution '10'. Set the actual result of step 1 to 'API returned 500 error' and step 2 actual result to 'API returned 200 success'

{
  "testExecutionIdOrKey": "10",
  "steps": [
    {
      "actualResult": "API returned 500 error"
    },
    {
      "actualResult": "API returned 200 success"
    }
  ]
}

Expected Output: Test steps are updated successfully, but no output is expected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stepsNo
testExecutionIdOrKeyYesThe ID or key of the test execution. Test execution keys are of the format [A-Z]+-E[0-9]+

Tool Definition Quality

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description explains that only included fields are modified and shows via examples how empty objects leave steps unchanged. This adds value beyond the annotations (idempotentHint=true) by clarifying partial update behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose but includes three detailed examples, making it somewhat verbose. The examples are helpful but could be shortened or placed in a separate section to improve conciseness.

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?

For a mutation tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers partial update behavior, expected output (success with no return), and uses examples to illustrate typical use cases. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema provides descriptions for both parameters, but the description adds value through examples demonstrating how to structure the steps array for partial updates, including using empty objects to skip steps. This clarifies usage beyond the schema alone.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states it updates test steps for a given test execution, with details on modifying status and actual results. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like zephyr_update_test_execution, which updates execution-level fields, not steps.

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 three examples illustrating different use cases (full update, partial update, updating only actual results), implying when to use the tool. There is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons to alternatives like zephyr_get_test_execution_steps.

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