Skip to main content
Glama

list_test_suites

Retrieve test suites for a specific project in Zebrunner Test Case Management, supporting pagination, hierarchical views, and multiple output formats.

Instructions

📋 List test suites for a project (✅ Verified Working)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_keyYesProject key (e.g., 'android' or 'ANDROID')
project_idNoProject ID (alternative to project_key)
formatNoOutput formatjson
include_hierarchyNoInclude hierarchy information
pageNoPage number (0-based)
sizeNoPage size (configurable via MAX_PAGE_SIZE env var)
page_tokenNoPage token for pagination
include_clickable_linksNoInclude clickable links to Zebrunner web UI

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:129-148 (registration)
    MCP tool registration for 'list_test_suites', including inline input schema validation and execution handler that fetches suites via ZebrunnerClient and returns JSON.
    server.tool(
      "list_test_suites",
      "Return list of Zebrunner test suites for a project (requires project_key or project_id)",
      {
        project_key: z.string().optional(),
        project_id: z.number().int().positive().optional()
      },
      async (args) => {
        const { project_key, project_id } = args;
        if (!project_key && !project_id) {
          throw new Error("Either project_key or project_id must be provided");
        }
        const suites = await client.listTestSuites({ projectKey: project_key, projectId: project_id });
        const data = suites.map((s: unknown) => {
          const parsed = TestSuiteSchema.safeParse(s);
          return parsed.success ? parsed.data : s;
        });
        return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
      }
    );
  • Zod input schema definition for listTestSuites tool parameters (imported but uses inline equivalent in handler).
    export const ListTestSuitesSchema = z.object({
      project_key: z.string().optional(),
      project_id: z.number().int().positive().optional()
    }).refine(data => data.project_key || data.project_id, {
      message: "Either project_key or project_id must be provided"
    });
  • Core API client method implementing the test suites list fetch from Zebrunner API, called by the MCP tool handler.
    async listTestSuites(params: TestSuiteParams): Promise<any[]> {
      const { projectKey, projectId } = params;
      const res = await this.http.get("/test-suites", {
        params: { projectKey, projectId }
      });
      // API returns {items: [], _meta: {}} structure
      return Array.isArray(res.data) ? res.data : (res.data?.items || []);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the tool is 'Verified Working' but fails to describe pagination behavior (implied by page/size parameters), authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens when no test suites exist. For a listing tool with 8 parameters, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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?

The description is appropriately brief with a single sentence that states the core purpose. The emoji and verification status add minimal clutter. However, the verification note ('✅ Verified Working') doesn't provide actionable information for tool selection and could be considered slightly extraneous.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a listing tool with 8 parameters, pagination capabilities, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what format the listing returns, how pagination works with page_token, or what hierarchy information includes. With no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the tool's behavior and results.

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?

The description mentions 'project' which aligns with the required 'project_key' parameter, but adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3 - the description doesn't compensate for any gaps because there are none in the schema, but it also doesn't add meaningful parameter insights.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('test suites for a project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_all_tcm_test_suites_by_project' by being a general listing tool rather than TCM-specific. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_root_suites' or 'get_all_subsuites', which prevents a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that also retrieve test suites or related data (e.g., 'get_all_tcm_test_suites_by_project', 'get_root_suites', 'get_suite_hierarchy'), there's no indication of when this listing tool is preferred over those more specific options.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/maksimsarychau/mcp-zebrunner'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server