alm_find_test_instance

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

With no annotations, the description provides the return format and notes partial match support. However, it lacks details on whether partial matches return multiple results, the exact matching behavior, or error handling. It does not disclose authorization or destructive potential (likely read-only).

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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and structured with separate lines for args and returns. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Given the low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the purpose, parameters, and return format adequately. Minor gaps include not specifying behavior when multiple partial matches exist or if the test set ID is invalid, but overall it is sufficient.

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 0%, but the description adds full meaning for both parameters: test_set_id explained as ID of the test set and test_case_name as name with partial match info. This compensates entirely for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 tool finds a test instance inside a test set by test case name with partial match support. It distinguishes from siblings like alm_find_test_by_name (finds test case) and alm_find_test_set (finds test set) by specifying the scope (inside a test set) and the returned entity (test instance).

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 description implies usage when you have a test set ID and test case name, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like alm_list_test_instances. No guidance on when not to use or exclusions.

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