Get task by ID

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

The description only restates the basic get-by-ID operation and adds no behavioral context beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already provides. It does not mention return format, error handling, or access requirements. Since the annotations cover the read-only nature, the description provides minimal additional value.

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 short sentence that immediately states the purpose with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 operation with a single parameter, the description conveys the essential information. However, with no output schema, it would be helpful to mention that it returns the task object. The absence of such detail is a minor gap, but overall the description is adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 only the parameter name 'id' with no description (0% coverage). The description's phrase 'by ID' clarifies that the parameter is the task's identifier, which is essential for correct invocation. This compensates for the schema gap, though it doesn't add type or format details beyond the schema's integer type.

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 specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'task' and identifies the lookup mechanism 'by ID', making it unambiguous what the tool does. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like kommo_tasks_list or kommo_tasks_update.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kommo_tasks_list. However, the description implies it should be used when a specific task ID is known and a single task is needed. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so usage is implied rather than explicit.

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