get_task

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the content of the response by enumerating the fields included, which provides meaningful behavioral expectation. However, it does not address error scenarios, authentication requirements, or explicitly state that the operation is read-only.

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, well-structured sentence that leads with the core function and efficiently lists the included details. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately outlines the returned information. It lists key content areas, which compensates for the missing output schema. However, it does not cover potential error responses or field-specific structures, leaving minor 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?

The schema fully documents the single parameter `id` as 'The task UUID', giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but since the schema already covers it, the baseline score applies.

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 tool's purpose: to retrieve detailed information about a specific task. It lists the specific data categories returned (description, assignees, subtasks, tags, time tracked, child tasks), distinguishing it from task mutation tools like assign_task or delete_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?

The description implies usage for retrieving task details, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, so guidance is limited to what is obvious from the tool name and description.

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