Skip to main content
Glama
Cafelatte1

FronyBoard

by Cafelatte1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_task

Retrieve the full record for a single task by ID when you already know it, including period and waiting-on details; no project key is needed.

Instructions

Use it when you know a task id and need the whole record (task details).

Read one task in full by id (DLY-042) — the project comes from the prefix, so no key
is needed. Returns the record with its period. Use this instead of list_tasks whenever
you already know the id; search_tasks when you only know a word from it. The record also
carries `waiting_on` when it applies.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly frames the operation as a read and discloses useful return details such as the record's period and `waiting_on` when applicable, though it does not discuss permissions, rate limits, or not-found behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The usage guidance is front-loaded and the description is appropriately short for a one-parameter read tool. There is minor redundancy between the opening usage sentence and the subsequent "Read one task in full by id" sentence, but no significant waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the low complexity, one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, id format, and key return details. It does not fully document the record shape or error behavior, but it is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the id format via the `DLY-042` example and clarifying that the project is derived from the prefix, so no separate project key is needed. It could be slightly more explicit that the single required parameter is `task_id`, but the semantics are clear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: "Read one task in full by id" and "get the whole record (task details)." It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by naming list_tasks and search_tasks and the conditions that separate them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: "when you know a task id and need the whole record." It also names alternatives: use list_tasks when you already know the id is not the need, and search_tasks when you only know a word from it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools