get_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Get' strongly implies a read-only retrieval operation, and the description states what data is included. However, it does not explicitly say there are no side effects, nor does it mention error behavior or permissions, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence that leads with the action and target, then adds a relevant detail about custom_fields. Every word earns its place and there is no 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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential context: it fetches a specific task's full details and explicitly calls out the custom_fields array. It could be more explicit about the full return shape, but the low complexity of this tool makes the current description sufficient.

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, so the description's 'by ID' adds no meaningful semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. With high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('task'), and a specific selection mechanism ('by ID'), while also highlighting the custom_fields array. This clearly distinguishes it from list_tasks and other sibling tools without needing extra context.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when a client has a task_id and needs full details for that single task. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it does not earn a 5, but the intended usage is unambiguous.

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