addCase

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It describes the creation action and parameter dependencies but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or error handling. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 paragraph is concise and covers key points. Could be slightly improved with bullet points or clearer separation of sections, but overall efficient.

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 13 parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately explains the core usage and parameter interplay. Missing return value info but acceptable.

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%, but description adds value by categorizing parameters as REQUIRED/OPTIONAL, clarifying the relationship between templateId and customStepsSeparated, and explaining customFields usage.

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 'Creates a new test case in TestRail' and specifies required parameters (sectionId, title) and optional parameters. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like addBdd, addRun, etc., by focusing on test case creation.

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?

Provides guidance on using getCaseTypes for typeId values and explains the interplay between templateId and customStepsSeparated. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or compare with alternatives like updateCase.

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