Find runx skills by what they do. Returns each match with its skill id, owner, description, latest version, and trust tier, so a caller can pick one and then read it in full with get_skill.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum matches to return. | |
| query | Yes | What the skill should do, in plain words. An empty string browses everything. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds transparency by specifying the return fields (skill id, owner, description, latest version, trust tier) and the intended flow. It does not mention errors or edge cases, but the annotations cover safety.
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 concise and well-structured. The main purpose is stated upfront, followed by the return details and the relationship to get_skill. No unnecessary words or fluff.
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 description provides sufficient context for a caller to understand what the tool returns and how to proceed after using it. It mentions the sibling tool get_skill, giving a complete workflow without requiring an output schema.
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 descriptions for query and limit are already clear and complete (100% coverage). The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameters, so the 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to find skills by what they do. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_skill by noting that the caller should use get_skill to read a skill in full after picking it from the search results.
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 explains when to use the tool (to find skills based on functionality) and implicitly when not to use it (use get_skill for reading a full skill). It provides a clear scenario but does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools beyond the sibling.
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.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_skills finds skills by criteria, while get_skill retrieves full details for a specific skill. There is zero overlap in functionality, making selection unambiguous.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_skill and search_skills. The verbs (get, search) are distinct and descriptive, and the noun (skill) is consistent, creating a predictable naming convention.
With only two tools, the set is minimal and on the thin side of the typical 3-15 tool range. However, for a focused read-only discovery server, this count is defensible, though it does not offer the breadth usually expected from an MCP server.
The domain of discovering and inspecting runx skills is fully covered: search_skills provides the discovery mechanism, and get_skill provides the detailed inspection. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated purpose of evaluating and selecting skills.