Retrieve recent test run summaries to review test outcomes and identify failures across Jest, Vitest, or Pytest.
List recent test run summaries.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of runs to return (default: 10) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only listing via 'List', but says nothing about permissions, pagination, ordering, or what a 'summary' omits versus a full run record.
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 short sentence with no waste and the purpose front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than optimally 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?
For a simple zero-required-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable but omits what a 'summary' contains and how results are ordered or paginated, which the agent would want when calling it.
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% and the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds only the word 'recent', which mildly implies a default sort order not stated in the schema.
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 (List) and resource (recent test run summaries), which is clearer than a tautology. However, it does not differentiate itself from siblings such as get_failures, get_test_detail, or list_artifacts, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.
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 siblings, no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. 'recent' hints at a recency scope but the agent gets no trigger conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.