list-test-case-results

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a read-like operation but does not confirm side effects, permissions, rate limits, or output format. This is insufficient for a tool with no other behavioral hints.

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 bare phrase. While front-loaded, it lacks necessary details and structure. It is under-specified, not concise.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, and the presence of 3 parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, pagination, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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%, with each parameter described adequately. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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?

The description 'List test case execution results' conveys the action and resource but lacks specificity. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'list-test-cases' or 'list-test-suites'. The resource is clear but the scope and context are vague.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context for filtering, ordering, or prerequisites. Agents would have no basis to decide between this and similar list tools.

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