update-test-case-scenario

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses that all existing steps are replaced (destructive), but does not mention reversibility, required permissions, or error states. Minimal but correct.

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 sentences with no wasted words. Action and key behavioral note front-loaded. Ideal conciseness.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return value; it does not. Also lacks error conditions or test case existence requirement. Adequate for simple update but could be improved.

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 describes both parameters with 100% coverage (id as test case ID, steps as array with detailed definition). Description adds no additional meaning beyond schema. Baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states verb 'update' and resource 'scenario (steps) of a test case'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'update-test-case' which likely updates other fields, and 'get-test-case-scenario' for read operations.

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?

Implies usage for updating steps, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives like 'update-test-case' or prerequisites. The note 'Replaces all existing steps' indicates a replacement behavior but not usage context.

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