mcp-testops

by gribanoveu

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

get_test_case_steps

Read a test case's scenario steps as a nested tree or raw map by ID to inspect step bodies and expected results.

Instructions

Read the scenario (steps) of a test case.

as_tree=true (default) returns nested steps: {id, body, expectedResult, attachmentId, sharedStepId, children}. as_tree=false returns the raw scenarioSteps map by id. A shared step appears as a node with sharedStepId only - its own steps are not inlined. Attachment contents are not inlined either.

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": {
      "test_case_id": "<test_case_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_test_case_steps"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`as_tree`	No
`test_case_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

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses two non-obvious behaviors — that shared steps appear as sharedStepId nodes without their children inlined, and that attachment contents are not inlined either. It omits permission requirements and failure modes, which is why it isn't a 5.

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?

Front-loaded purpose in one line, then the mode behavior, then two caveats. Every sentence adds information; nothing is repeated from the schema or padding.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with an output schema, this is largely sufficient — the description explains the two return shapes and the two non-inlined edge cases that an agent would otherwise misread. Only error conditions and permissions are absent.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: as_tree is fully explained (true = nested with explicit field list, false = raw scenarioSteps map by id), including the default. test_case_id is left unexplained, though it is self-evident and required.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: "Read the scenario (steps) of a test case." That clearly separates it from get_test_case (metadata) and add_test_case_step (mutation). It doesn't name a sibling to differentiate explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the scope line and by the as_tree branching, which tells the agent which mode to pick for nested vs raw output. There is no explicit when-to-use versus get_test_case or get_test_case_history, and no error or empty-case guidance.

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