get_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation and does not mention return format, error handling, or the ability to select specific fields via the `fields` parameter. For a read tool, this is a significant gap because the agent cannot anticipate response structure or side effects.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words. It is perfectly concise for a simple 'get by ID' operation, and every word adds meaning.

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 has only two parameters and no output schema, but the description is too sparse for an AI agent. It fails to mention that the `fields` parameter can customize the response, and it does not describe what the function returns. Additional context about field selection and response format would make it 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?

The input schema has high description coverage (100%) for both `taskId` and `fields`. The description adds nothing beyond 'by ID', which aligns with `taskId`, but since the schema already documents all parameters, a 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 'Получить одну задачу по ID' (Get one task by ID) clearly states the action (get), the resource (task), the scope (one), and the selector (ID). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool `get_tasks` which retrieves multiple tasks, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage when a single task ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like `get_tasks` or list-type tools. There is no mention of exclusions or context, but the 'by ID' phrase provides some implied usage guidance.

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