get_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It mentions the option to include subtask hierarchy but does not specify what 'detailed information' entails (e.g., fields returned). The description is adequate but lacks specifics expected given no 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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and optional behavior. No unnecessary words.

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?

With no output schema, the description omits any information about the return value structure. The tool has 3 parameters, and the description covers them via schema, but the output is completely unspecified, leaving a significant gap in completeness.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The baseline is 3 as per rules; no extra value is contributed.

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 retrieves detailed information about a specific task by ID, with optional subtask hierarchy inclusion. It uses a specific verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_tasks or get_task_count that retrieve multiple tasks or summaries.

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 implies usage when detailed info on a single task is needed, but provides no explicit context on when to prefer this over similar tools like get_task_count, list_tasks, or get_project_tasks. No guidance on when to include children or not is given.

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