get_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the returned fields and the important parentTaskId behavior for top-level tasks vs. subtasks, which goes beyond a simple 'get task' statement. It does not mention error/not-found behavior, but 'Get' clearly signals a read-only 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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the verb and resource before enumerating returned fields. Every piece of information earns its place, especially given the absence of an output schema.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it names the ID criterion, lists the returned fields, and clarifies the special parentTaskId semantics. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 schema already covers the only parameter fully with id, type string, minLength, and 'id.primaryKey'. The description adds the modest semantic that the ID is 'stable', but does not need to supply much additional parameter meaning because coverage is 100%.

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 verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('task'), and a precise selection method ('stable ID'). The detailed field list distinguishes this from list_tasks and from get_project/get_folder/get_tag siblings.

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 that the tool should be used when an agent already has a stable task ID and needs full detail, but it does not explicitly name list_tasks as the alternative for discovering tasks or state when not to use get_task. The usage context is clear, but exclusion guidance is absent.

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