Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
testit-mcp-server

testit-mcp-server

by iampopovich
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_test_plan_test_suites

Read-only

Retrieves the test suite tree for a test plan, including nested child suites, so you can inspect and understand the plan's suite structure.

Instructions

Get the test suite tree of a test plan (suites with nested children).

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": {
      "testPlanId": "<testPlanId>"
    },
    "name": "list_test_plan_test_suites"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
testPlanIdYesTest plan UUID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact beyond that: the result is a nested tree rather than a flat list. It says nothing about depth limits, pagination, or whether empty suites appear.

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 the tree structure flagged up front and no filler. It is efficient, though terse enough that a few more words of routing context could fit without bloat.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential contract: what it returns and its nesting. Missing only secondary details such as ordering or handling of suites without children.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Only one parameter, testPlanId, and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage as a 'Test plan UUID.' The description's phrase 'of a test plan' merely restates the schema, adding no format or edge-case detail; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the test suite tree of a test plan', and parenthetically clarifies the return shape ('suites with nested children'). This clearly separates it from siblings like list_test_plan_tags or list_test_plan_configurations, which address different sub-resources, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 only implied by the name and the resource it operates on; there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement. Reasonable for a narrow, single-purpose read tool, but an agent gets no explicit routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools