Get TraeCN Task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat that. It adds the caution that this is 'not a progress primitive,' which prevents misuse. It also implies the trace level is for diagnosis, which is a behavioral context.

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 three sentences: the first states the core function, the second gives usage conditions, and the third adds a caution. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 output schema exists and covers return values, the description covers the essential aspects: what it reads, when to call, and how to request more detail. It also provides the anti-pattern (polling) guidance, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 schema already documents both parameters (taskId and detailLevel) with descriptions. The description adds that detailLevel 'trace' is 'for diagnosis' and clarifies that the default result returns 'status plus final result,' providing semantic context beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Read' with a specific resource ('one known gateway task by ID') and explains the two modes (status+result vs. full trace). It distinguishes itself from siblings by implying it's a non-mutating read operation, which is unique among the listed 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?

The description explicitly instructs when to call: 'once when notified of completion or once later when resuming after a disconnect.' It also warns against polling: 'Not a progress primitive — do not poll in a tight loop.' This gives clear usage timing and alternatives.

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