get_task

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

The annotations already clearly indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description's job is lighter. The description adds the behavioral context that the tool retrieves status and details of orchestration tasks, consistent with readOnlyHint. It does not contradict annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the essential information without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the purpose.

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 the tool has no output schema, the description explains what is retrieved (status and details) but doesn't list specific fields. However, the task type examples (deploy, resize, rollback) provide useful context. The annotations cover safety aspects fully.

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 input schema already has 100% description coverage for the single parameter, explaining that the task ID is the ID returned by Spinnaker. The description reiterates this context, adding 'orchestration task' type, which reinforces the parameter's use.

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 gets the status and details of a Spinnaker orchestration task, with examples of task types. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('orchestration task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_execution' or 'get_pipeline'.

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 mentions the task ID is returned by Spinnaker when an operation is submitted, providing context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the sibling tool names (e.g., cancel_execution) imply other actions.

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