task_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Task by number' without indicating whether the operation is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. The existence of an output schema partially covers return values, but no behavioral traits are described.

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 a single short phrase. While brief, it is under-specified rather than effectively concise; it lacks substantive content needed to understand the tool. It does not earn its place because it adds minimal value over the tool name.

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?

With no annotations and a vague one-phrase description, the tool is inadequately contextualized. The agent cannot determine the tool's scope, how the 'fields' parameter affects the response, or when to choose this over task_list. The output schema exists but does not compensate for the missing usage context.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters, including a detailed list of available field names for the 'fields' parameter. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters.

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 'Задача по номеру' (Task by number) is a noun phrase that does not explicitly state an action like 'retrieve' or 'get'. It indicates the resource (task) and key (number/id) but lacks a verb, making the purpose only inferable from the tool name. It does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools such as task_list, though 'by number' hints at retrieving a single task.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like task_list or create_task. The description does not mention appropriate contexts, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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