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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Load' implies a read-only fetch and the relative-path scoping constraint is useful, but nothing is said about what happens on a bad path or unknown skill name, nor what the response contains (file text vs. metadata).

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the dependency on get_skill second.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should indicate what the tool returns (raw file contents, truncation, encoding). It covers the call mechanics adequately but leaves the return shape unknown for a tool whose entire purpose is retrieving content.

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% and both parameters are already documented ('Exact skill name', 'Path relative to the skill folder, e.g. references/env-vars.md'). The description's example duplicates the schema rather than adding format or constraint detail beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Load one supporting file ... from a skill folder') and gives a concrete example path, which distinguishes it clearly from the sibling get_skill that lists files rather than fetching one.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent through get_skill's file list to obtain a valid path, which is real sequencing guidance. It does not state exclusions or what to do if the file is missing, but the usage context is clear.

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