rlm_htask_get

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully carry behavioral transparency. It only says 'Get,' implying a read operation, but fails to disclose effects (none expected), permissions needed, rate limits, or behavior when 'include_children' is false. The agent lacks critical safety context for a read 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?

The description is a single sentence of six words, highly concise and front-loaded. It could incorporate brief sibling guidance without losing conciseness, but as is, it is efficient and clear. No extraneous words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explain the return format (e.g., whether it includes the task object with nested children). It also lacks context about when to use this vs. sibling tools. For a simple retrieval tool, it is adequate but not complete for an agent to use confidently without trial and error.

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 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 states 'Get a hierarchical task with its children,' specifying the verb and resource. It implies retrieval of immediate children, differentiating it from siblings like rlm_htask_tree (full tree) or rlm_htask_audit_trail. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from these siblings, so it scores 4 rather than 5.

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 alternatives. For example, it does not mention that rlm_htask_tree should be used for the full hierarchy or that rlm_htask_audit_trail is for history. The agent receives no context for selection.

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