checkvist_get_task_tree

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: output is readable text, includes subtasks, and can be large (implied by the max_depth tip). This helps the agent anticipate response characteristics and size management.

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, direct and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second gives a practical tip. No filler or redundancy; every word contributes.

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 absence of an output schema, the description at least states the output format ('readable text'). It covers the essential behavior and a practical size limitation tip. Parameter details are fully covered by the schema, so the description is adequately complete for a read-only tool.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all 6 parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. It reinforces the max_depth parameter's purpose ('limit size'), but does not add significant semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource as 'a specific task and its subtasks', which clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_task (single task) and get_tasks (list). It also mentions the output format ('readable text'), further clarifying the tool's purpose.

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 clear context: retrieving a task subtree in readable text. It also offers a practical usage tip ('Use max_depth to limit size'), which guides invocation. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_task or get_tasks, so the guidance is not exhaustive.

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