get_task_by_id

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'including attachment metadata when available' but does not clarify if the tool is read-only, if it mutates state, or behavior when both parameters are provided. This leaves gaps for an agent.

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 sentence of 18 words, containing all essential information without waste. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource.

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 retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. However, it could elaborate on parameter mutual exclusivity and the return format (e.g., always returns a single task). Still, it is largely complete.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds that the parameters are alternatives ('by ID or name'), which is also implied in the taskName schema description. Thus, minimal added value beyond 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get information about a specific task by ID or name, including attachment metadata when available.' It specifies the verb (Get), resource (specific task), and method (by ID or name), distinguishing it from sibling tools that filter tasks.

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 when a task ID or name is known, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like filter_tasks or get_tasks_by_tag. No guidance on parameter selection (ID vs name) or prerequisites.

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