squally-mcp

Official

by squallydev-admin

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Get a test's status

squally-get-test-status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve flakiness status and active signals for a single test to quickly assess its reliability without scanning the full test list.

Instructions

The stored flakiness status and active signals for ONE test. Cheap - one findUnique. Use this when you are asking about a single test; do not reach for squally-list-flaky-tests, which is expensive.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filePath`	No	The spec file of the test, as stored (e.g. tests/checkout.spec.ts); an empty value means a test with no file. Pass it exactly as shown in Squally; do not URL-encode, the server does. Needed only when the name exists in several files - the ambiguous_test error lists them.
`testName`	Yes	The full test name as Squally stores it (the Playwright title path), for example "checkout flow > completes payment". Pass the name exactly as shown in Squally; do not URL-encode, the server does. A name used in several spec files also needs filePath.
`projectId`	Yes	A project id from GET /projects.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`test`	Yes
`labels`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`activeSignals`	Yes
`awaitingFirstWrite`	Yes	True when the test is known but no verdict has been stored for it yet; status then reads insufficient_data.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that by disclosing cost and implementation footprint: 'Cheap - one findUnique.' It also clarifies that the returned status is the stored one, which helps set expectations about freshness.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose and scope are front-loaded, and the alternative-avoidance guidance is compactly included in the second sentence.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description is complete for a read-only single-record lookup. It states what is returned, how cheap it is, and when to use it. The output schema exists and covers return shape, so the description does not need to explain return values in detail.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description reinforces the single-test scope but does not add significant new meaning about how to fill projectId, testName, or filePath beyond what the schema already provides.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states exactly what the tool does: it returns 'the stored flakiness status and active signals for ONE test.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and explicitly contrasts itself with squally-list-flaky-tests, making the purpose easy to distinguish from siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives direct when-to-use guidance: 'Use this when you are asking about a single test.' It also names the alternative to avoid and why: 'do not reach for squally-list-flaky-tests, which is expensive.' This is explicit and actionable.

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

Deploy Server