bitrix_get_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It states that the tool retrieves full task information, which suggests a read-only operation, but it does not describe permissions, output shape, or what 'full information' actually includes. It adds little beyond the tool name.

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 one short, well-structured sentence with no filler. Everything present earns its place and the key resource and operation are front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so a short description is acceptable. However, because there are no annotations and no output schema, the description could have explained what fields 'full information' includes or how the response is structured. It is adequate but not complete.

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 already fully documents taskId with type, description, bounds, and requirement. The description adds only a generic 'by ID' reference, which repeats the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because schema coverage is 100% and no additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 identifies the action ('get full information') and the resource ('task by ID'). It is specific enough to distinguish from list-type tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or explain how it differs from bitrix_get_task_history.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. It only implies usage when a task ID is known, but does not state exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites, which is especially important given the large task-related sibling set.

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