Search a Qmetry test cycle folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Search', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, permission requirements, or rate limits. The brevity leaves the agent uncertain about side effects or constraints.

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 sentence of 9 words—highly concise with no unnecessary content. While it could be more informative, it earns points for efficiency. Front-loading is not an issue due to brevity.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., folder ID, details). It does not. Moreover, with multiple sibling search tools, no differentiation is made, making it incomplete for an agent to choose 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes all three parameters (projectId, folderName, mode). The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the tool's purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance understanding of the parameters.

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 title and description clearly state the tool searches for a Qmetry test cycle folder, specifying it is 'for a given project'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'search-qmetry-test-case-folders' or 'search-qmetry-test-plan-folder', missing an opportunity to clarify when to use this tool over others.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, when to prefer this search over other search tools, or exclusions. Given the many sibling tools with similar purposes, this is a significant gap.

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