yg_task_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds mild behavioral context ('full card' suggests comprehensive return), but omits permissions, rate limits, or response details. Adequate for a simple read operation.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence, front-loaded with key information, and contains no filler or redundant words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and scope. The term 'full card' hints at return content, but could be more explicit about what fields are included.

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 description repeats the parameter's role ('by id') without adding new details like ID format or source. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter explanations.

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 explicitly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('one task'), the method ('by id'), and a key feature ('full card'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings that list, create, or chat 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?

While no explicit when-not or alternatives are given, the description strongly implies the use case: retrieve a single task's complete data when its ID is known. Sibling names like yg_tasks_list and yg_task_create further clarify context.

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