List enabled Sutra skills
list_skillsReturn metadata for reusable skills the user has enabled in Sutra.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skills | Yes |
list_skillsReturn metadata for reusable skills the user has enabled in Sutra.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| skills | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -trueOutput schema / propertiesAdded value: +{
+ "skills": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "created_at": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "description": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "file_count": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "slug": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "source_agent": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "total_bytes": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "version": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "slug",
+ "name",
+ "description",
+ "version",
+ "source_agent",
+ "file_count",
+ "total_bytes",
+ "created_at"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+}Output schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "skills"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds one piece of genuine context – that only enabled skills are returned, not all skills – which is meaningful but modest given no parameters and a simple read operation.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The scope qualifier ('enabled in Sutra') is placed where it will be read first, and nothing is wasted.
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?
With no parameters, full annotation coverage, and an output schema that defines the return shape, the description need only state what is listed. It does so adequately, though it could note that skills are returned as metadata objects rather than full content (contrasting with get_skill).
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description is needed to clarify parameter usage, and it introduces no misleading parameter implications.
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 names a specific verb ('Return metadata') and resource ('reusable skills') with a clear scope qualifier ('the user has enabled in Sutra'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_skill, but the plural/collection framing makes the distinction reasonably inferable.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_skill or get_skill_resource. The 'enabled' qualifier implies a filtered listing but the description never states when this is the right call or what it excludes.
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.