AgentPlaybooks

Get skill

get_skill

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the full definition of one skill in this playbook, including name, description, content, priority, and attachments. Identify the skill with skill_id, which may be a UUID or the skill's kebab-case name. This lookup does not modify the skill. Use list_skills first to discover IDs and names. Do not use list_skill_versions (historical revisions) or get_playbook (persona and summaries, not full skill content). Pass playbook_id as the UUID or GUID of the playbook this call should target.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skill_id`	Yes	Skill ID or name
`playbook_id`	Yes	UUID or GUID of the target playbook

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`name`	No
`content`	No
`licence`	No
`priority`	No
`created_at`	No
`description`	No
`playbook_id`	No
`publisher_id`	No
`skill_attachments`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Description states 'This lookup does not modify the skill,' consistent with annotations readOnlyHint true, idempotentHint true, destructiveHint false. It adds context beyond annotations by detailing identifier flexibility (UUID or kebab-case name) and return contents, which is useful for agent decision-making.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is compact (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds distinct value: what it returns, how to identify, safety, usage order, alternatives, and how to pass playbook_id. No redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple lookup with only two parameters and a rich output schema, the description covers purpose, identification method, non-mutating behavior, discovery workflow, and exclusions. It is fully complete for this tool's complexity, especially given strong annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining skill_id may be UUID or kebab-case name and advising 'Use list_skills first to discover IDs and names,' which helps agents construct parameter values correctly. This extra guidance pushes score beyond baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'Return the full definition of one skill in this playbook' and lists included fields (name, description, content, priority, attachments). It explicitly differentiates from siblings list_skill_versions and get_playbook, stating what they do NOT provide, so purpose is specific and distinct.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Use list_skills first to discover IDs and names' and 'Do not use list_skill_versions (historical revisions) or get_playbook (persona and summaries, not full skill content).' This clearly directs when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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

All AgentPlaybooks tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct entity and action (e.g., delete_memory vs delete_skill vs delete_run), and even similar operations like read_memory vs search_memory vs get_memory_context have clearly differentiated purposes. The descriptions are detailed and explicitly cross-reference other tools to avoid confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_*, list_*, update_*, delete_*, read_*, etc.), with plurals used uniformly for list operations (list_playbooks, list_runs, list_secrets). No mixed conventions or ambiguous verbs; the naming is highly predictable and systematic.

Tool Count4/5

With 48 tools, the server covers a broad but coherent set of domains (playbooks, personas, skills, memory, canvas, runs, secrets, MCP servers, and discovery). While this exceeds the typical 3-15 range, each tool serves a distinct and necessary function within the comprehensive playbook management scope, so the count feels justified rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface provides complete CRUD and lifecycle coverage for every entity type: playbooks, personas, skills (including versioning and rollback), memory (including hierarchical tasks and tiering), canvas (with locking and patching), runs, secrets (including rotation and usage), and MCP servers. Additionally, find_tools covers discovery for federated tools, leaving no apparent dead ends.

Get skill

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources