get_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation returns full task content including all properties, subsections, and task items, and points to a format specification guide. It does not discuss error behavior or side effects, but 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the return content is well specified.

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 two sentences with no filler. The operation and identifier examples are front-loaded, and the return content summary plus format guide pointer are compact and useful.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description's summary of return content and the pointer to the task-format guide cover the main expectations. It does not specify behavior for ambiguous substring matches, but that is a minor gap given the schema and guide link.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds value above the schema by providing concrete examples of valid identifier formats (#+NAME 'task-gh-28', ticket ID 'GH-28'), which help an agent construct correct inputs. The section parameter is already well documented in the 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 states the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'specific task,' and defines the identifier formats with concrete examples (#+NAME, ticket ID, headline substring). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tasks or search_tasks, which operate on collections rather than a single known task.

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 clearly indicates the tool is for retrieving a specific task when an identifier is available. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the identifier-based operation makes the usage context clear.

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