Get task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is established. The description adds value by enumerating the fields returned (title, status, etc.), but it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like authentication requirements or rate limits. The description is consistent with annotations, and no contradiction is present.

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 and front-loaded: the first sentence delivers the core purpose, and the second sentence concisely lists the returned fields. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. It lists the full set of fields included, making the return value clear. The read-only annotation and explicit field enumeration satisfy the needed context.

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 the 'id' parameter already described as 'Task UUID' with format uuid. The description's mention of 'by its UUID' merely restates what the schema provides, adding no new semantic information 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 tool's function: 'Get full details of a single task by its UUID.' This specifies a distinct verb, resource, and scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_tasks (which retrieves multiple tasks) and get_task_by_number (which uses a different identifier).

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 when full details of a specific task identified by UUID are needed, and the emphasis on 'by its UUID' contrasts with get_task_by_number. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, so it falls short of full guideline clarity.

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