get_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly communicates that the tool returns a detailed representation including comments, attachments, and subtask count. It does not mention error handling or side effects, but as a read operation, the description suffices.

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, front-loaded sentence followed by an example. Every word earns its place, with no wasted length.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, return content, and an invocation example. It does not need to explain return values or error cases at length.

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 fully documents task_id as a UUID string with 100% coverage. The description's example ('Show me task <id>') adds a usage illustration but does not introduce new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb + resource ('Get full detail for a single task') and enumerates the response contents (fields, comments, attachments, subtask count), making it clearly distinct from sibling tools like list_tasks, update_task, or delete_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 phrase 'single task' strongly implies when to use this tool (fetching one task's details) versus listing tasks or performing mutations. The example 'Show me task <id>' provides practical context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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