Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tuskr-mcp

tuskr-mcp

by Zapkid
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

set_test_case_automated

Update the automated flag on a test case to indicate whether it is automated or manual. Set the custom field 'automated' to true or false.

Instructions

Set the custom Tuskr field automated on an existing case (true or false).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "app_name": "<app_name>",
      "case_key_or_id": "<case_key_or_id>",
      "automated": "<automated>"
    },
    "name": "set_test_case_automated"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
app_nameYes
case_key_or_idYes
automatedYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only states it's a write operation on a field. Lacks details on side effects, validation, or return value behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource, no unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema exists, but description lacks prerequisites (e.g., case must exist) and error conditions. Adequate for simple tool but could be improved.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%; description does not explain 'app_name' or 'case_key_or_id' beyond the schema. Only 'automated' is mentioned by name but no further details.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Description clearly states the verb 'set', the resource 'existing case', and the specific field 'automated' (true/false). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'set_test_cases_automated_bulk' and 'get_test_case'.

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?

Implies usage for setting the automated flag on a single case, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusion of sibling bulk tool. No prerequisites or context provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools