memory_task_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose edge cases like what happens when no active task exists, whether the task is user-scoped or global, or any side effects. This is a minimal but adequate disclosure for a simple getter.

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 concise single sentence that fully captures the operation without extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it immediately scannable.

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 no-parameter getter with an output schema present, the description is mostly sufficient. It identifies the resource and action, and the output schema can cover return details. A minor gap is not explaining what 'active task' means in the broader task lifecycle, but this is inferable from sibling tool names.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain beyond the already-empty schema. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately lacks parameter-specific commentary.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current active task'), making it clear this is a retrieval operation. It is implicitly distinct from sibling tools like memory_task_set and memory_task_done, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as memory_task_set, memory_task_done, or other memory tools. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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