task_thread

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

No annotations provided; description mentions what content is included (signals, notes) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, pagination behavior, or any side effects. Adequate but not fully transparent.

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?

One sentence, efficient and clear. Loses a point for not being more structured (e.g., bullet points for parameters).

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?

Tool has 3 parameters and no annotations. Description covers main functionality but misses the k parameter. Output schema exists, so return values are not required.

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 has 0% description coverage; description explains task_id and include_notes but not the k parameter (likely a limit). With 3 parameters, only 2 are described.

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?

Description clearly states the tool replays a spawned task as a chronological thread of signals and optional notes. It specifies the resource (spawned task) and the action (replay), distinguishing it from similar tools like task_logs and 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 for reviewing task activity chronologically but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria.

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