read_task

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses the behavior: it uses SOAP API, reads by key, returns a TaskDto2 dict, and raises specific errors (PlanviewValidationError, PlanviewNotFoundError, etc.). No destructive action implied.

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?

Description is front-loaded with context and alternatives, then explains usage and errors. While thorough, it is slightly verbose with the full error list and example block; could be tightened slightly but still effective.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, error handling, and return type. Nothing essential is missing.

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 100% with one parameter (task_key). The description adds significant value by providing the exact formats (key://, search://, ekey://) and concrete examples, going beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 it reads a task by key using SOAP API, with a specific verb ('read') and resource ('task'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting that for richer queries with custom attributes, other tools should be used.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool (reading by key) and when to use alternatives (getTasksByProjectIds or getTasksByTaskIds for custom attributes). Also notes the SOAP nature and key formats.

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