Skip to main content
Glama
vilaabo

zephyr-scale-mcp

by vilaabo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_attachments

Read-only

List attachments from a Zephyr Scale test case, test run, or test result. Optionally filter by step index for test cases and test results.

Instructions

List the attachments of a Zephyr Scale test case, test run (cycle) or test result — optionally of a single step (GET /testcase/{key}[/step/{i}]/attachments, /testrun/{key}/attachments or /testresult/{id}[/step/{i}]/attachments). Addressing: target 'test_case' requires testCaseKey (stepIndex optional to address a specific step); target 'test_run' requires testRunKey (no step addressing — the API has no per-step endpoint for runs); target 'test_result' requires testResultId (stepIndex optional). Pass ONLY the identifier that matches the chosen target. Returns the attachment list as reported by the API; the numeric ids can be passed to delete_attachment.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesKind of entity the attachment belongs to: test_case, test_run or test_result
stepIndexNo0-based step index to address a single step instead of the whole entity (targets 'test_case' and 'test_result' only)
testRunKeyNoTest run (cycle) key, e.g. PROJ-R123 — required when target is 'test_run'
testCaseKeyNoTest case key, e.g. PROJ-T123 — required when target is 'test_case'
testResultIdNoNumeric test result id — required when target is 'test_result'. Result ids are returned by create_test_result / update_last_test_result / get_test_run_results.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint: true; the description confirms it's a read operation. Adds context about the return format ('list as reported by the API') and that ids are usable for deletion. No pagination or error details, but adequate for the complexity.

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?

Single dense paragraph with clear front-loading of purpose followed by systematic breakdown of targets. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Covers all essential aspects for a list tool with multiple target types and step options. Mentions return value and downstream use of ids. No output schema, but description is self-sufficient.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Adds significant meaning beyond the input schema: explains the addressing logic per target, where stepIndex is allowed, and where testResultId originates. Schema coverage is 100%, yet description enriches understanding.

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 clearly states the action ('List the attachments') and the resources (test case, test run, test result, optionally per step). It differentiates itself from siblings like delete_attachment and download_attachment by specifying exactly what it lists.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use each target, which parameters are required ('Pass ONLY the identifier that matches the chosen target'), and how stepIndex applies. Mentions a sibling (delete_attachment) for context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools