run_automation_tests_by_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits such as execution time, side effects, return behavior, or prerequisites. It only states the action without any additional context, so the agent has no information about what happens when tests are run.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise, although it lacks depth; structure is clean and not verbose.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description should indicate what the tool returns or whether it is asynchronous. It only says 'Run automation tests' without mentioning outcomes, results, or other behavior, making it incomplete for an execution tool.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the 'category' parameter with examples and a clear meaning. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 action 'Run' and the target 'automation tests' with a specific filter 'matching a category pattern'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like run_all_automation_tests and run_automation_test by indicating a category-based selection.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus run_automation_test or run_all_automation_tests. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, leaving the selection entirely up to the agent.

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