tasks_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' which implies a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens with invalid taskIds. The description is minimal and leaves critical behavioral aspects unspecified.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately.

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 3 parameters (0% documented in schema), no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what details are returned, how parameters affect the response, or how this differs from other task-related tools. The minimal description leaves too many gaps for effective tool selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 3 parameters, the description doesn't compensate at all. It mentions 'specific task' which hints at taskId, but provides no information about the optional 'properties' and 'associations' parameters or their purposes. The description adds minimal value beyond what's implied by the tool name.

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 'Get details of a specific task' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('task'), but it's vague about what 'details' includes and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like tasks_list or tasks_search. It's adequate but lacks specificity about the scope of information retrieved.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tasks_list (for multiple tasks) or tasks_search (for filtered searches). The description implies it's for a single task but doesn't explicitly state this or mention prerequisites like needing a taskId.

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