Api task templates retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description does add one genuinely useful behavioral fact — unauthorized related fields are masked in the response — which is not visible in annotations. It omits error/not-found behavior and whether masking is field-level or object-level.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, which is an appropriate size for a simple getter. It is not front-loaded with the resource identity, but there is no wasted text.

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 one-param retrieve tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers return masking but leaves the entity unnamed, the id semantics unexplained, and lookup-failure behavior unstated. It is too thin given zero schema documentation on the only parameter.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%: the single required parameter `id` has no description in the schema, and the description does not clarify that it is the task template identifier or its format (UUID vs ref_id). With one undocumented required parameter, the description should have compensated and does not.

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?

"Return a single object" essentially restates the verb in the tool name (retrieve) without ever naming the resource (task templates). An agent must parse the tool name to learn what entity is fetched; the description alone does not tell it apart from the hundreds of sibling *_retrieve tools.

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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named — not list vs retrieve, not object_retrieve vs retrieve vs cascade_info_retrieve, all of which coexist for task templates. Nothing tells the agent which of these to pick.

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