linear_getCycleIssues

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

Annotations already indicate this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds transparency about available filters (state, assignee, labels, completion status) and implies default behavior via includeCompleted, which is valuable beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, then lists relevant filters. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with an output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description is largely complete. It could mention default values for limit and includeCompleted, and the required cycleId, but the essential capabilities are covered. The sibling list confirms it's a specific getter for cycle issues, not a generic search.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds a grouping of 'PM-friendly filters' that contextually organizes the filters, helping an agent understand the tool's use case better than raw schema alone.

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 ('Get issues') and the resource ('a cycle'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like linear_getCycleById (returns cycle metadata) and linear_searchIssues (general search) by emphasizing cycle-specific filtering.

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 for retrieving cycle issues with filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like linear_getCycles or linear_searchIssues. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions, so it's adequate but not exemplary.

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