Freelo Get Task Description

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that only the description content is fetched and that this variant is more lightweight than the details endpoint, which helps agents predict response scope and cost.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, the comparison to the sibling is placed second, and every word contributes to helping an agent decide whether to invoke this tool.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter), the schema fully documents that parameter, the output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover safety. The description provides the missing contextual piece—when to choose this over freelo_get_task_details—making the definition 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 description coverage is 100%: taskId is fully documented with type, required status, an example, and a source (freelo_get_all_tasks). The description does not add parameter-specific details, but the schema already carries the full burden, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Fetches only the description content of a task') on a clear resource, and explicitly distinguishes itself from freelo_get_task_details. An agent can immediately understand what this tool does and how it differs from a closely related sibling.

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 names the alternative freelo_get_task_details and provides the selection condition: use this tool when 'you only need the description text.' It also tells the agent where to obtain the taskId (from freelo_get_all_tasks), giving clear practical guidance.

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