Add input validation to cyclic_sort to prevent invalid inputs

[Gairola788]

Describe your change:

Added input validation to the cyclic_sort algorithm to prevent invalid inputs from causing infinite loops or incorrect results.

The function now raises a ValueError when:

• the input contains duplicate numbers.
• a number is outside the valid range 1 to n.

Fixes #14898

• Add an algorithm?
• Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
• Add or change doctests? -- Note: Please avoid changing both code and tests in a single pull request.
• Documentation change?

Checklist:

• I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
• I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
• This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
• All new Python files are placed inside an existing directory.
• All filenames are in all lowercase characters with no spaces or dashes.
• All functions and variable names follow Python naming conventions.
• All function parameters and return values are annotated with Python type hints.
• All functions have doctests that pass the automated testing.
• All new algorithms include at least one URL that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
• If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the description above includes the issue number(s) with a closing keyword: "Fixes cyclic_sort.py has no input validation, causes infinite loop on invalid input #14898".

[Claudiocli]

Input validation seems adequate to constraints

[Gairola788]

Input validation seems adequate to constraints

Thank you for reviewing the changes and confirming that the input validation meets the constraints. I really appreciate your time and approval!

[daltino]

The validation loop is O(n) extra work before the sort even begins, which is fine, but more importantly it fundamentally changes the contract of the function in a way that's inconsistent with how cyclic sort is typically presented as an educational algorithm. The whole point of cyclic sort is that it handles duplicate detection implicitly — by adding a pre-check that raises on duplicates, you're essentially duplicating the effort the algorithm itself would reveal. More practically, the doctest examples don't cover the new ValueError paths at all, so the new validation code is completely untested per the automated checks. You should add doctests like >>> cyclic_sort([1, 2, 2]) and >>> cyclic_sort([1, 5]) with the expected exceptions. Also, the reformatting of the swap from a one-liner to a multi-line tuple is an unrelated style change that muddies the diff — best to keep that separate.