While the purpose of a plaintiff’s petition or complaint is to inform the court and the defendant of what the plaintiff’s claims will be at trial, the purpose of special exceptions is to force clarification and specification in the pleadings when they are not clear, or sufficiently specific, or fail to plead a cause of action.

In Idaho, as in many jurisdictions, the initial pleading filed by a plaintiff is known as a complaint, which sets forth the plaintiff's claims and the factual basis for those claims. The purpose of the complaint is to provide notice to the defendant of the claims against them and to establish the framework for the litigation. Idaho does not use the term 'special exceptions,' which is more commonly associated with Texas law. However, Idaho does have similar procedural mechanisms, such as motions for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e) of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure. This motion can be used by a defendant when a complaint is so vague or ambiguous that the defendant cannot reasonably prepare a response. If the court grants such a motion, the plaintiff is required to file an amended complaint with greater specificity. Additionally, Idaho Rule 12(b)(6) allows a defendant to file a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, which challenges the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claims. These procedural tools serve the purpose of ensuring clarity and specificity in legal pleadings, similar to the function of special exceptions in other jurisdictions.