List test cycles

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as safe. The description adds value by disclosing the hierarchy traversal behavior (root vs children) and name filtering. It doesn't mention pagination or response format, but these are not critical for a simple list operation.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundancy. Every sentence adds a specific detail: root behavior, child behavior, and name filtering.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the key context: hierarchy and filtering. It doesn't discuss pagination but that's a minor gap for a list operation with good annotations.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it restates parentId's behavior and the parentType matching relationship, but this is already implied by the parameter descriptions.

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 identifies the tool as listing test cycles. It specifies behavior with and without parentId, distinguishing root-level and child cycles, and mentions name filtering. This separates it from other list tools like qtest_list_test_cases and qtest_list_test_suites.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use root vs child listing: 'With no parentId, returns root-level cycles. Provide parentId (and the matching parentType) to list children.' It also notes name filtering, but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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