Xray Get Test

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content-level context by naming the definition variants returned (steps/Gherkin/unstructured) and the folder/Jira field payload, but says nothing about errors, permissions or missing-test behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the verb and resource and then enumerates the returned content. No filler, no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be re-explained, annotations cover the safety profile, and all four parameters are schema-documented. The description is sufficient to call the tool, with the only real gap being the lack of routing guidance against the near-identical expanded/versions siblings.

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 'test', 'fields', 'include_relations' and 'include_requirements' are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format or default information beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one Xray Test') and enumerates what the payload contains: type, steps/Gherkin/unstructured definition, folder and Jira fields. The word 'one' implicitly separates it from the plural sibling xray_get_tests, but it never addresses xray_get_expanded_test, which an agent would likely confuse it with.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus xray_get_expanded_test, xray_get_test_versions or xray_get_tests. The single-item framing gives a weak implied context (fetch one test by key), but no explicit conditions or exclusions are offered.

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