asana_get_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves information, implying read-only behavior, but does not disclose permissions, response format, potential errors, or side effects. The description is too minimal to provide meaningful transparency beyond what the tool name already implies.

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, tightly worded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any filler. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place in the description.

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 tool with a well-covered schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, since there is no output schema to clarify return values, the vague 'detailed information' leaves some ambiguity. The lack of usage guidance and behavioral context (no annotations) slightly reduces completeness, but the low complexity of the tool makes this a borderline 3.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for both task_id and opt_fields. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. The parameter meanings are clear solely from 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 'Get detailed information about a specific task' clearly identifies the action (get) and the resource (specific task), distinguishing it from siblings like asana_search_tasks (searching) and asana_get_multiple_tasks_by_gid (multiple tasks). The phrase 'specific task' aligns with the singular task_id parameter.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used when you have a known task ID, nor does it suggest alternatives like search for finding tasks. Usage context is only implied by the word 'specific'.

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