Skip to main content
Glama

get_plans

Retrieve all test plans from a Qase project to organize testing strategies and track progress.

Instructions

Get all test plans in a project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYes
limitNo
offsetNo

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function for the 'get_plans' tool. Wraps the client API call with pipe and toResult utility.
    export const getPlans = pipe(
      client.plans.getPlans.bind(client.plans),
      toResult,
    );
  • Zod schema for input validation of the 'get_plans' tool parameters: code (required), limit and offset (optional).
    export const GetPlansSchema = z.object({
      code: z.string(),
      limit: z.number().optional(),
      offset: z.number().optional(),
    });
  • src/index.ts:200-204 (registration)
    Tool registration in the list of available tools, specifying name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'get_plans',
      description: 'Get all test plans in a project',
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(GetPlansSchema),
    },
  • MCP tool call dispatcher handler that parses arguments using the schema and delegates to the getPlans function.
    .with({ name: 'get_plans' }, ({ arguments: args }) => {
      const { code, limit, offset } = GetPlansSchema.parse(args);
      return getPlans(code, limit, offset);
    })
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' and 'offset' parameters), authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'all' means in practice (e.g., completeness of results).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter usage, return values, and behavioral context, making it inadequate for reliable tool invocation without additional assumptions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'code' refers to (likely a project identifier), or how 'limit' and 'offset' affect pagination. This leaves key parameters undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('all test plans in a project'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_plan' (singular) or 'list_projects', which could cause confusion about scope or alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_plan' (for a single plan) or 'list_projects' (for projects). The description implies usage for retrieving multiple plans but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rikuson/mcp-qase'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server