Fetch full details for one task—including its brief, acceptance criteria, and submission—by UUID with MOJOMO_AGENT_KEY.
Full detail on one task, including the brief, acceptance criteria, and any submission. Requires MOJOMO_AGENT_KEY.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Task UUID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It does disclose that an auth key (MOJOMO_AGENT_KEY) is required and enumerates the returned content, but says nothing about behavior when the id is unknown, task visibility restrictions, or that it is a read-only operation.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by the auth requirement. No filler, though the auth note could be tightened.
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 read tool with no output schema and no nested objects, stating the returned fields plus the auth prerequisite covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. Only error/empty-result behavior is unaddressed.
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?
Single required param 'id' with 100% schema coverage and a clear 'Task UUID' description in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
Specific verb (get) plus resource (one task) plus the exact payload it reveals: brief, acceptance criteria, submission. The singular 'one task' implicitly separates it from mojomo_list_tasks and mojomo_next_task, though it never names them.
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?
Usage is only implied — an agent can infer this is the deep-dive follow-up after list_tasks/next_task returns an id. There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no exclusions naming the sibling tools that also surface task data.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.