runrunit_get_task_description

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add behavioral context by calling out 'rich-text' and listing what the description may contain (requirements, acceptance criteria, links). However, it does not disclose output format, possible empty/null returns, or any read-only safety guarantee, though 'Get' strongly implies non-mutation.

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 sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the usage guidance directly follows. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter getter, the description gives enough context to use it correctly: what it returns, when to call it, and why. Minor omissions like exact rich-text format or error behavior are acceptable given the low complexity, but a fully complete description could have mentioned them.

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 100%, and the only parameter task_id is adequately described as 'Task ID' in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('rich-text description of a task'), and distinguishes it from the sibling runrunit_get_task by explaining that it loads fuller context. This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: after runrunit_get_task and before starting work. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the usage context is clear enough for a simple getter.

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