retrieve_cycle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as response format, error handling, or scoping rules, so it contributes little beyond the annotations.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple retrieval tool, conveying the core action without verbosity.

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?

With no output schema and a minimal description, the tool lacks explanation of the return value (e.g., the cycle object structure) and the role of project_id. The description is too sparse to fully inform an agent about behavior and expected results.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (project_id, cycle_id) with zero description coverage. The description says 'by ID' but does not explain which ID is which, why project_id is needed, or their relationship. This leaves both parameters semantically unclear.

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 action 'Retrieve', the resource 'cycle', and the method 'by ID'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_cycles and other retrieve_* tools by specifying the target entity.

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 implies usage when a single cycle ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus list_cycles or provide exclusions. No alternatives are mentioned, so guidance is minimal.

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