complete_cycle

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

The description details the mutation: setting end_date to today. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, side effects) are disclosed beyond the core action.

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 well-structured: a main sentence, explanatory context, then Args and Returns. It is concise but includes valuable explanation, which prevents a higher score for brevity.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with annotations and implied output schema, the description covers purpose, why it exists, and parameter roles. It lacks details on error conditions or prerequisites (e.g., if cycle already closed), but overall adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds basic parameter descriptions ('UUID of the project', 'UUID of the cycle to complete'), providing minimal meaning beyond the type. More detail (e.g., format, constraints) would improve the score.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Complete (close) a cycle by setting its end date to today.' It also explains the context that Plane lacks an explicit 'complete' action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_cycle.

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 explains the use case for closing a cycle and the reason for this tool's existence. It implicitly differentiates from update_cycle but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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