Get Test Suite Contents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by clarifying that this is a targeted, non-recursive read and that it only returns directly assigned test cases, which is beyond what the annotations or schema alone convey.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds only the scoping details needed to avoid misuse with broader read tools.

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?

For a simple, read-only, idempotent tool, the description combined with the fully described schema and existing output schema is complete. The agent has everything needed to call it correctly: required parameter, optional parameters, output format, and behavioral boundaries.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all five parameters. The description does not add meaning about parameters beyond what the input schema already provides; therefore the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get test cases directly assigned to one test suite.' It distinguishes itself from broader enumeration and recursive traversal by calling itself a 'targeted hierarchy read,' which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_test_cases and list_test_suites.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use it: when the agent needs only test cases directly assigned to a single suite. It also states exclusions—does not enumerate unrelated suites or recursively traverse the project tree—but it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for recursive traversal, so it falls just short of a 5.

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