run_regression

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces this by labeling 'MUTATING: This executes tests'. It also discloses the dryRun default and return format, adding value beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second adds mutation warning and default behavior. Front-loaded and no wasted words.

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?

Provides a high-level understanding of the return value (pass/fail summary with highlighted failures) despite no output schema. For a mutation tool with 6 parameters, the description covers the essential behavioral context and output format adequately.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description reiterates the dryRun default and its purpose, which adds marginal value. No further parameter details are needed beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'runs', the resource 'all Cognigy.AI playbooks in a project as a regression test suite', and distinguishes from sibling tools like run_playbook by focusing on regression testing of all playbooks.

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: use dryRun=true to preview, and warns that it is mutating. Differentiates from single-playbook execution (run_playbook) via the regression test context. Could explicitly list alternatives, but the purpose implies the correct usage.

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