Argus

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Export Regression Test

export_test

Destructive

Generates a Playwright regression test from a verified finding, replaying the user journey so it fails while the bug exists and passes after the fix.

Instructions

Write a Playwright test for a verified finding: replays its journey, fails while the bug is present, passes once fixed. run=true repeats writes and requires authority. Application values are private parameters. save_private_values=true stores local raw values only when the user explicitly requests retention; never publish that file.

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": {
      "finding_id": "<finding_id>"
    },
    "name": "export_test"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`run`	No
`finding_id`	Yes
`save_private_values`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`run_id`	Yes
`stages`	No
`status`	Yes
`recovery`	No
`operation`	Yes
`error_code`	Yes
`session_state`	Yes
`schema_version`	No
`progress_omitted`	No
`progress_delivery_failed`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.1Nov 5, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / save_private_values
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
Addedv0.12.0Oct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses that run=true repeats writes and requires authority, and it explains the test's expected fail-to-pass behavior. It also provides substantial privacy guidance: application values are private, raw values are stored locally only with explicit retention consent, and the resulting private-values file must never be published.

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?

The description is compact and front-loads the artifact, input prerequisite, and regression semantics. The remaining sentences each add distinct operational or privacy constraints without repeating schema defaults or annotation values.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Together with the schema, annotations, and output schema, the description supplies enough context for an agent to invoke the tool cautiously and handle private values correctly. Remaining gaps include the source of finding_id, the default non-running workflow, and differentiation from regression_check, but the output schema removes any need to describe return values here.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description meaningfully explains run and save_private_values, including their side effects and preconditions. finding_id is only indirectly explained through the phrase 'verified finding,' with no guidance on its source or format, and the practical effect of leaving run at its default is not stated.

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?

The description gives a specific action and artifact: writing a Playwright test for a verified finding. Replaying the finding's journey and failing before the fix but passing afterward clearly distinguish this regression-test export from siblings that record, inspect, or check behavior.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It establishes a verified finding as the prerequisite and gives explicit conditions for run=true and save_private_values=true, including user-requested retention. It does not explain when to choose this tool over regression_check or clarify the intended run=false workflow.

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