testit-mcp-server

search_configurations

Read-only

Search configurations by name substring across projects or within the current project, with paging, sorting, and optional filtering.

Instructions

Search configurations by name substring across projects (default: current project).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_configurations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`page`	No	1-based page number; alternative to skip. Uses "size" (default 50).
`size`	No	Page size for "page"; alias of take.
`skip`	No	Number of items to skip (offset).
`take`	No	Max number of items to return.
`orderBy`	No	Sort expression, e.g. "createdDate desc".
`isDeleted`	No
`projectId`	No
`projectName`	No
`searchField`	No	Field name to search in.
`searchValue`	No	Value to search for in searchField.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered, but the description adds little beyond the default-project scoping note. It says nothing about result ordering, pagination behavior, soft-deleted records (isDeleted), or how substring matching is applied.

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 tight sentence with the core scope front-loaded and no wasted words. It is arguably too short for an 11-parameter tool, but nothing in it is filler.

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?

For an 11-parameter tool with no output schema and only partial schema descriptions, the definition covers the headline behavior but leaves the competing pagination (page/size vs skip/take) and the searchField/searchValue path unexplained. An agent could call it, but might easily pick the wrong parameter combination.

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?

Schema coverage is 64%, giving a baseline of 3, and the description does add real meaning by clarifying that 'name' is a substring match (the schema leaves 'name' undocumented) and that project scoping defaults to the current project. However, it says nothing about how searchField/searchValue relate to 'name', or how page/skip/take/orderBy interact.

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 ("Search configurations") plus the matching mode ("by name substring") and scope ("across projects"). It distinguishes the operation from plain enumeration, though it never names the closest sibling (list_configurations) to sharpen the boundary.

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: an agent can infer it should use this when it has a name fragment rather than wanting all configurations. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of list_configurations or search_configuration_parameters as alternatives.

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

Deploy Server