cor_get_task_messages

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, what data is returned, pagination, or ordering. It's a bare minimum statement without behavioral context.

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 very short, but it lacks essential details. It is more under-specified than concise. Effective conciseness would include key points without excess; here, it omits too much.

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 low complexity (1 param, output schema exists), the description should explain return values or behavior. It does not. The output schema presence reduces burden somewhat, but the description still fails to provide a complete picture of what the tool does.

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 0% (description doesn't explain parameters). The description merely lists task_id in the args section but adds no meaning beyond the schema. With only one parameter, the description could have provided format or constraints but did not.

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 'Get messages for a task' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like cor_get_task (gets task details) and cor_get_project_messages (gets messages for a project). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other message-related 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., cor_get_project_messages). No context about prerequisites or conditions. The description lacks any usage recommendations.

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