get_todo

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

The description discloses detailed return fields (checkbox text, parent task, assignee, due date, time estimates, comments, attachments) which goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. No contradiction with annotations.

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: a single-sentence purpose, a one-line usage guideline, and a bullet list of returns. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 the simple input (one parameter), presence of output schema, and read-only annotation, the description covers purpose, usage, and return details comprehensively. No gaps.

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?

Only one parameter (todo_id) with schema description 'Productive todo ID'. The description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema description coverage, baseline score of 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 clearly states 'Get a specific todo checklist item by ID' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_todos and get_task by specifying it's for a single todo checklist item.

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 explicit guidance on when to use ('when you need full details of a specific todo') and lists what is returned. It implicitly excludes using for listing, but does not name alternatives like 'use list_todos instead'.

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