search_test_cases

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. Only mentions 'search' and 'optional automated_filter'. Does not disclose pagination behavior, default page size, or what the automated_filter values are (e.g., 'any', 'automated', 'manual'). No indication of whether results are full test cases or summaries.

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?

Single sentence effectively front-loads purpose, but is overly brief given the complexity. Every word earns its place, but important details are omitted. A slightly more detailed but still concise description would be optimal.

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 9 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not cover filtering by section/suite, required app_name, or pagination. Output schema exists but description doesn't mention return structure. Incomplete for effective selection and invocation.

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%, so description must compensate. It mentions query (key/title/steps) and automated_filter, but does not explain critical parameters like app_name, section_id, suite_id, page, or page_size. Adds minimal semantics beyond schema field names.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches test cases by key, title, and steps text, with an optional automated filter. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_test_case (single retrieval) and get_test_cases_by_section (filtered by section). However, it could be more explicit about the search scope across multiple fields.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_test_cases_by_section or list_sections. Does not specify prerequisites, when not to use, or alternatives. The description assumes the agent infers usage from context.

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