Get task summary

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so no side effects need to be stated. The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by specifying the source of the data ('Summary tab') and enumerating the exact return fields, which is valuable since there is no output schema.

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 one sentence that front-loads the action ('Read a task's summary') and immediately follows with essential context and return shape. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant expansion of structured data.

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-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fully complete: it states the purpose, the exact data returned, and the source context. The annotations cover safety, so no further disclaimers are needed.

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 already documents task_id with 100% coverage ('Task UUID') and a clear required status. The description adds no new parameter-specific detail, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully covers the parameters and the tool has only one parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and identifies the exact resource ('a task's summary'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_task (full task) and set_task_summary (write operation). The em-dash clarification and return fields remove any ambiguity about what this tool retrieves.

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 when to use this tool: when you need the summary digest shown in a task's Summary tab. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can differentiate it from get_task or get_task_comments.

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