list_skillsList the agent skills Mitosis publishes (backup create/list/restore/health/diff/schedule/subscribe) with links to each SKILL.md manifest.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag | No | Filter skills by tag (e.g. "backup", "restore", "schedule"). Omit for all. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that it lists skills with links to manifests, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations already convey.
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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the purpose, examples, and result. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.
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 is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the key points: listing skills, including specific examples, and linking to manifests. Slightly incomplete as it doesn't note what happens if the tag filter yields no results, but adequate for a list tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'tag' is fully documented. The description does not add meaning beyond listing skill examples; it doesn't elaborate on filtering behavior not already in the schema.
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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'agent skills', with explicit examples of skills and mention of links to manifests. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_platform_status or search_docs which cover different domains.
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 for listing Mitosis skills but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives. Sibling tools are named in context but no comparative guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
There is significant overlap between cortex_ask, cortex_recall, and search, all of which retrieve from the user's memory. cortex_recall explicitly describes itself as a subset of cortex_ask, and search's description is nearly identical to cortex_ask's core function, making it hard for an agent to choose correctly. Other tools are more distinct, but this triple overlap creates real ambiguity.
The naming is inconsistent: memory tools are split between a cortex_* prefix (ask, recall, manifest, status, etc.) and bare fetch/search, with no clear rule for which gets the prefix. Within cortex_*, some are verbs (ask, recall, remember) and some are nouns (manifest, status, connectable_sources), and platform tools use get_/list_/search_ prefixes, resulting in a mixed and unpredictable naming pattern.
13 tools is a reasonable number for a server covering both memory operations and platform information. However, the presence of three overlapping retrieval tools (cortex_ask, cortex_recall, search) slightly inflates the count, suggesting some redundancy rather than each tool earning a unique place.
The server covers core workflows: reading memory (ask, search, recall, fetch, manifest), writing memory (remember, ingest_conversation), checking health (status), and accessing platform info (get_platform_status, get_pricing, list_skills, search_docs). Minor gaps include no explicit update/delete for individual memories and no direct tool to connect new sources (only listings of connectable ones), but these are often user-driven actions.