get_task

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses that linked entities are expanded by default and lists specific details returned. However, it does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, or authentication needs, which are typical for a get 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 concise: one opening sentence, one sentence on default behavior, and a bulleted list of use cases. No redundant information, front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (linked entities, specific fields like contacts, properties, projects, viewings, appointment details, todo status). For a low-complexity tool with only 2 parameters, this is fully sufficient.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining default expansion behavior and giving examples of what the 'include' parameter controls, going beyond the schema.

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 the verb (get), resource (task), and method (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_activities and list_* tools by focusing on a single task with full detail.

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?

Explicit bullet points list specific use cases (view context, check linked entities, see appointment details, check completion). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the context is clear and informative.

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