Get Test Cycle

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'get details' which implies a read operation but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, required permissions, or response characteristics.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the key information. It is appropriately concise for a simple get operation, though it could add value without becoming verbose.

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 tool's low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. However, the absence of an output schema means the agent has no expectation of return data, which could be improved.

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%; both parameters (fields, idOrKey) have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline 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?

The description 'Get details of a specific test cycle' clearly identifies the verb (Get), resource (test cycle), and scope (specific, requiring an identifier). It differentiates from sibling tools like create, update, delete, and search.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search-qmetry-test-cycles, get-test-cycle-linked-defects, or other get-* tools. The agent receives no context on selection criteria.

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