query_suite

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the dual-mode behavior (single vs. many) driven by payload.action, which is beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand how the tool's output varies. No contradictory behavior is disclosed.

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 that conveys the essential purpose and operation selection without any filler. It earns its place efficiently.

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 moderately complex oneOf schema and no output schema. The description explains the operation modes but does not describe the return format, error behavior, or any limitations like pagination. While annotations cover safety, the description leaves out details that would be helpful for a complete understanding of expected responses.

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%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description reiterates the action parameter's role ('set payload.action to one or many') but does not add new meaning to suite_id or project_id beyond what the schema provides. This aligns with the baseline for fully described schemas.

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 verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'test suite(s)', and specifies the two modes: single or all for a project. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cases or query_run by targeting suites specifically, especially with query_suite vs mutate_suite.

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 gives operational instructions ('Set payload.action to one or many') but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, such as 'use mutate_suite for modifications.'

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