get_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses that the lookup works by iterating subject pages, has a cost premium, and is bounded by max_pages. It does not detail auth or error behavior, but the output schema covers the return contract.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core lookup behavior, followed by cost guidance and parameter clarification. No filler.

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 read-style lookup with an output schema and a small parameter set, the description provides essential routing, qid format, and iteration bound. Remaining details are covered by schema defaults and the output schema.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description compensates for qid by specifying the 6-hex format and for max_pages by calling it the upper bound of iteration. Subject is only implied through 'subject pages', but its meaning is inferable from the parameter 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 states a specific operation: finding a task by a short 6-hex qid through iterating subject pages. It also contrasts with list_tasks by qid-vs-guid, making its role distinct among siblings.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool when you know the qid but lack guid, and warns that it is more expensive than list_tasks. This provides a clear routing rule and names the alternative.

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