get-todo-task

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

Beyond readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, the description discloses the critical unsupported $select behavior (with an error example), the HTML format of the body, and the inclusion of checklist items and linked resources. This is rich contextual information that prevents misuse.

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 slightly long but well-structured with a tip and note, and every sentence carries useful information. The warning about $select and the expand hint are front-loaded. It's not tautological and earns its length.

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 there is no output schema, the description mentions key return components (body content, checklist items, linked resources) and the single-task behavior. It doesn't exhaustively list all properties, but for a read operation with a well-known Graph object, the coverage is adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds critical semantic value by explicitly stating $select is unsupported (contradicting the schema which lists it), and by suggesting $expand=linkedResources. This goes beyond what the schema alone conveys.

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 tool reads a todoTask object, specifies it returns a single task, and mentions key return fields (body content, checklist items, linked resources). This distinguishes it from siblings like list-todo-tasks and update-todo-task.

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?

It provides usage guidance by warning that $select is not supported and recommending $expand=linkedResources for related data. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with list-todo-tasks, the 'single task' phrasing implies the appropriate use case. More explicit exclusions would push it to 5.

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