testit-mcp-server

assign_test_points_tester

Idempotent

Assigns a tester user UUID to selected test points in a test plan and returns affected point IDs; use user IDs from existing entities because TestIT has no user list API.

Instructions

Assign a tester (user UUID) to the given test points of a test plan. TestIT has no user list API: take user ids from existing entities (createdById, testerId). Returns the affected point ids.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "userId": "<userId>",
      "testPointIds": "<testPointIds>"
    },
    "name": "assign_test_points_tester"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Test plan UUID.
`userId`	Yes	Tester user UUID.
`testPointIds`	Yes	Test point UUIDs (see list_test_suite_test_points / search_test_points). Must not be empty.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true). The description adds context annotations do not carry: the return value ('affected point ids'), which matters because there is no output schema, plus the user-id sourcing constraint. It does not state what happens when a point already has a tester, which is a minor gap for an assignment tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the practical constraint, then the return value. Every sentence carries information the agent needs and none is 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 3-required-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, value sourcing, and the return shape, which is nearly everything needed to invoke it correctly. The remaining gap is behavior on re-assignment of an already-assigned point.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how to obtain the userId value (createdById, testerId) since no user listing exists. That is non-obvious sourcing guidance the schema cannot express.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Assign a tester ... to the given test points of a test plan', which is concrete and immediately actionable. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling unassign_test_points_tester, but the 'assign' verb makes the opposite direction of that pair self-evident.

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?

No explicit statement of when to use this versus alternatives, and no preconditions are described (for example, whether it replaces an already-assigned tester). However, the note that TestIT has no user list API and user ids must be taken from createdById/testerId is real operational guidance that prevents a common failure mode.

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

Deploy Server