mcp-testops

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_launch

Retrieves a single Allure TestOps launch by its ID and returns details such as name, project, closure status, creation date, autoclose setting, release, tags, and links.

Instructions

Get one launch: id, name, projectId, closed, createdDate, autoclose, releaseId, tags, links.

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": {
      "launch_id": "<launch_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`launch_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.5Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only lists returned attributes. It says nothing about read-only safety, permission requirements, or what happens when the id does not exist, and the field list largely duplicates the existing output schema.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or hedging. The only inefficiency is that the field enumeration restates what the output schema already documents.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values, and the stated purpose is sufficient to call it. The unexplained required id parameter and absent not-found behavior leave gaps for a lookup tool.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single required parameter, so the description needed to explain what launch_id is and where to obtain it. It never mentions the parameter; the "id" in the field list refers to a returned attribute, not the input, so no meaning is added.

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

Purpose4/5

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

"Get one launch" states a specific verb and resource, and the enumerated fields make the retrieval scope unambiguous. It implies the single-item counterpart to list_launches through "one launch," though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of needing a known launch id, and no routing to alternatives such as list_launches for discovery or get_launch_statistic for metrics. The agent must infer the usage context from the name alone.

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