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

With no annotations, the description discloses the key side effect: 'Writes JSON to content/skills/<slug>.json', and the access requirement. This goes beyond the tool name, though it doesn't detail error behavior or reversibility.

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, no waste, and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word adds value.

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?

For a simple file-writing mutation, it covers the main behavior and auth prerequisite but lacks details on return values, validation, or handling of optional parameters. Given no output schema or annotations, more could be said, but it's adequate.

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 description adds meaning only for 'slug' via the file path notation, but leaves 'body', 'title', 'category', and 'tags' unexplained. With 0% schema description coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 ('Create or replace'), the resource ('a skill by slug'), and the scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_skill and get_skill via the upsert semantics.

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?

It provides clear context that this is owner-only and requires an Authorization Bearer token, implying privileged use. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the purpose statement is clear enough to infer when to use it.

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