run_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the return type ('latest task and session status') and conditional fields, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, idempotency, or whether the operation is read-only (implied but not explicit). Adequate for a simple GET but lacks depth.

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?

Two sentences: first states core purpose, second adds conditional detail. Efficient and front-loaded with no redundant wording.

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 the existence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description need not detail return values. For a single-parameter tool without annotations, the description covers its primary function and conditional behavior well. Lacks only a note on side effects or permissions, but the operation is inherently read-heavy.

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%, yet the description adds minimal meaning to the single parameter 'task_id' beyond stating it's for a task. No format, example, or constraints are provided. The description should compensate for the missing schema descriptions but does 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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'latest task and session status' for a task, with explicit mention of conditional context window fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'task_get' (likely more generic) and 'run_summary' (possibly aggregated view).

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 latest status with session details, but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool references. Without context signals, an agent may not know when to prefer this over similar tools like 'task_get' or 'run_summary'.

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