getTestRecordTestParameters

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Returns a list,' omitting important details such as pagination behavior (though parameters suggest it), authentication needs, error responses, or what happens if the test record doesn't exist. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. However, it could benefit from a bit more structure or additional context without becoming verbose. Still, it earns its place

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 tool has 10 parameters (5 required) and no output schema. The description does not explain the return value format, how test parameters are structured, or that pagination is supported (despite page_size/page_number params). For a tool with this complexity and no output schema, the description is too incomplete.

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%, with each parameter already described clearly (e.g., 'The Project ID.'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3, as 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a list of Test Parameters for a specified Test Record. The verb 'Returns' and resource 'Test Parameters' are specific. While the name itself distinguishes it from siblings like getTestRunTestParameters, the description does not explicitly differentiate, so a score of 4 is appropriate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getWorkItemTestParameterDefinitions or deleteTestRecordTestParameter. There is no mention of prerequisites or context. The description merely states the function without any usage context.

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