Get step-by-step installation instructions for a skill on a specific platform. / 플랫폼별 스킬 설치 가이드.
Args:
skill_id: 스킬 ID
platform: 플랫폼 이름 - 'OpenClaw' | 'ClaudeCode' | 'ClaudeCodeAgentSkill' | 'CustomAgent' | 'Cursor' | 'GeminiCLI' | 'CodexCLI'
Returns:
단계별 설치 가이드 문자열
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | No | OpenClaw | |
| skill_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type ('단계별 설치 가이드 문자열') but does not mention potential errors, permissions, or side effects. For a simple getter, this is somewhat adequate but lacks edge-case transparency.
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 front-loaded with the main purpose. The docstring format for Args and Returns is clear and compact, with no unnecessary information.
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 covers purpose, parameters, and return value. An output schema exists, so return details are less critical. It lacks edge-case or error handling information, but for a simple tool with two parameters, it is reasonably complete.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters in the Args section, including a list of valid platform values ('OpenClaw', 'ClaudeCode', etc.). This adds meaningful semantic detail beyond the bare 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 tool's function: 'Get step-by-step installation instructions for a skill on a specific platform.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('installation instructions'), and a scope ('for a skill on a specific platform'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_skill or get_skill_schema.
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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. However, the specificity of the purpose makes the usage context implicitly clear, so it earns a mid-range score.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, but check_vetting_status and get_vetting_result both deal with security vetting and could be confused. Similarly, get_agent_author_stats and get_agent_identity_stats overlap somewhat, though descriptions differentiate them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., search_skills, upload_skill_draft, get_vetting_result). No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
18 tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range (3-15), but the coverage of a skill marketplace (search, browse, upload, vet, review, stats, install) justifies the count. It doesn't feel bloated.
Core workflows are covered: search, download, upload, review, and status checks. However, there is no tool to update or delete an uploaded skill, and no way to list skills uploaded by a particular author, which are notable gaps for a marketplace.