test_run

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that execution is headless, defaults to Chromium, saves a report, and returns a summary with steps and report name. It does not mention that saveReport can disable report saving, nor does it describe failure behavior or other side effects.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded core behavior followed by key parameters and return value. The parameter recap is somewhat redundant with the schema, but the description remains efficient and scannable.

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?

The description covers the main behavior and return format, which partially compensates for the missing output schema. However, with 7 parameters and no annotations, it leaves out important nuances such as the optional report-saving behavior and the distinction from dataset-driven runs. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds brief grouping ('variable environment, per-run overrides, per-step timeout') but no real semantic value beyond what the schema provides; baseline 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 clearly states the specific action ('runs a saved test') and the context (headless, default Chromium engine, saves a report). It is easy to distinguish from listing/deleting tools, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling test_run_dataset, so it falls short of a 5.

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 intended use is implied by 'Runs a saved test' plus the required 'name' parameter. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusion criteria, and no mention of alternatives such as test_run_dataset or browser_run_step.

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