ticktick_get_by_id

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return states (null if not found, error format on failure) and freshness constraints with a suggestion to call ticktick_sync for immediate refresh. This is good behavioral context for a read operation.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by structured Args/Returns, a Freshness note, and an example. Every sentence adds value with 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 simple lookup tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers return types, error handling, and data freshness. The output schema handles return format specifics.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds 'The object's full ID.' and provides an example. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions, giving the agent meaningful guidance on the parameter.

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 'Look up any object (task, project, tag) by its ID.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair ('look up' by ID) and distinguishes from sibling tools like ticktick_get_all or ticktick_get_tasks_from_project.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It provides an example and freshness notes but does not clarify when to prefer this over ticktick_get_all or ticktick_filter_tasks.

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