mutate_run

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

Annotations already signal a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds that it creates or updates a test run, but it does not disclose side effects such as whether updating replaces all fields or whether creating without case_ids includes all cases. No contradiction but limited extra context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, no repetition or fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has a complex oneOf schema, and the description orients the agent appropriately without restating schema details. It could mention required fields per action, but the schema already covers that, so overall it is sufficiently complete.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter including action consts. The description's instruction 'Set payload.action to create or update' adds little beyond the schema's own descriptions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses specific verbs 'Create' and 'update' and identifies the exact resource 'test run in TestRail'. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like mutate_suite by naming the target resource and operation.

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 tells the agent to set payload.action to 'create' or 'update', providing clear context for when to use each mode. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it falls short of the highest bar.

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