Search Qmetry test plans

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

The description implies a read operation ('search and list') but does not disclose pagination behavior (though parameters exist), rate limits, or expected response format. Since no annotations are present, the description carries the full burden, and it adds minimal information beyond the tool name.

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 that is concise and front-loads the key action and resource. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., including the required projectId), but it is not verbose and every word contributes.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested filter, no output schema), the description is minimal. It does not explain the return format, provide examples, or clarify how filters combine. The missing output schema and lack of behavioral context leave significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance understanding of parameter usage or inter-dependencies.

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 action ('Search and list'), the resource ('test plans'), and the mechanism ('according to filters'). It distinguishes this tool from nearby siblings like 'get-qmetry-test-plan' (which likely retrieves a single plan) and other search tools, but does not explicitly differentiate from them.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus other search tools (e.g., search-qmetry-test-cases) or the required 'projectId' filter. With no annotations, the agent receives no context about typical use cases or alternatives.

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