Xray Get Test Runs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful note that results are paginated, but says nothing about how pagination interacts with the limit/start params or about result ordering. Adequate but thin beyond the annotations.

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 with zero filler, and the pagination caveat is appended compactly. Nothing is wasted, though it is arguably under-specified rather than maximally concise.

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?

With an output schema present the description needn't explain return values, and the safety profile is in annotations. But for a 10-parameter search tool it omits how filters combine (AND vs OR), whether test_run_ids overrides other filters, and result ordering, leaving moderate gaps.

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% across all 10 parameters, so the schema already documents each filter, its format, and defaults. The description only echoes the filter axes and adds no syntax, combining semantics, or note that test_run_ids bypasses the other filters. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

Specific verb (Search) plus resource (test runs) and enumerates the five filter dimensions, so an agent can distinguish it from xray_get_test_run (single run) and xray_get_test_executions (different resource). It never names those siblings explicitly, so differentiation relies on inference.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer xray_get_test_run or xray_get_test_progress instead, and no statement about combining filters. Usage is only implied by the filter list.

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