Search artifacts (qTest Query Language)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, establishing the safety profile. The description adds useful context with QQL syntax examples and the requirement to specify artifact type, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as result formatting or pagination beyond what the schema already provides for maxItems and fields.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with three illustrative examples. Every clause serves a purpose, with no redundant or filler content, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Combined with a fully described schema and read-only annotation, the description covers the essential usage, parameter requirements, and query syntax. It lacks an explicit description of the return shape, but no output schema exists, and for a search tool the absence is acceptable. Overall, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, with each parameter clearly explained. The description reiterates the objectType requirement and gives examples for the query parameter, but adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema's own parameter 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's action ('Search'), resource ('a project's artifacts'), and mechanism ('using qTest Query Language (QQL)'). It distinguishes from sibling listing tools (e.g., qtest_list_test_cases) by emphasizing query-based search across multiple artifact types.

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 provides example queries and instructs to 'Specify the artifact type to search,' implying the use case for flexible QQL queries. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling list tools or state when to prefer search over simple listing, leaving the comparative guidance implied rather than explicit.

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