testneo_get_pass_fail_trend

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

No annotations are provided; the description does not disclose whether this is a read operation, potential side effects, or output format. The word 'summarize' implies aggregation but lacks clarity on behavior.

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 sentence, concise but lacks structure. No breakdown of key information; it is adequate in length but missing essential details.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. Does not cover what the trend output looks like, pagination, or error conditions.

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 description coverage is 0%; the description does not explain any parameter. Only 'date range' hints at the range parameter, but project_id and limit are entirely unexplained.

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 verb 'Summarize' and the resource 'pass/fail trend', specifying scope 'for a project over a date range'. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'testneo_get_execution_summary' which summarizes a single execution.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'testneo_search_failures' or 'testneo_get_execution_logs'. No context on prerequisites or limitations.

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