create_plan

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description only confirms creation without adding behavioral details like side effects or required permissions.

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 concise sentence, no fluff. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, though it could slightly improve by omitting the obvious 'with selected test cases' since it's already in the schema.

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?

Despite moderate complexity (4 params, no output schema), the description lacks context on what the creation entails (e.g., return value, prerequisites like existing test cases, or related workflows). Agent may need to infer or test.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, simply echoing the purpose but not the parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' and resource 'test plan', with qualifier 'with selected test cases'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'create_case' or 'create_run' by specifying the object type.

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?

The description implies usage for creating a new test plan, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as 'update_plan' or other creation tools.

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