Get a To Do task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds a key behavioral detail beyond annotations: the notes body is truncated, informing the agent that the returned content is not fully complete. This is valuable 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by a precise list of returned fields and the ID prerequisite. Every word 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 read tool with two parameters, full schema coverage, and annotations covering safety, the description is complete. It conveys the returned fields, warns about truncation, and explains the dependency on sibling tool outputs. No gap that an agent needs to call it correctly.

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%, so both parameters are already documented with descriptions. The description adds source information—that the IDs come from specific sibling tools—which the schema does not provide, enhancing the agent's ability to fill parameters correctly.

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 ('Reads') and resource ('one To Do task') and enumerates the exact fields returned (title, status, importance, etc.), making it clear this is a single-task fetch distinct from todo_list_tasks and the mutation tools.

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 explicitly says the tool needs both listId and taskId, and tells the agent where those come from (todo_list_lists and todo_list_tasks). While it doesn't explicitly name when not to use it, the prerequisite and purpose make the usage context evident.

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