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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and destructiveHint false; the description adds value by specifying the return contents and the non-billable trait. It also explains that the tool only lists descriptions and member names, not full tool definitions, which is relevant behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded, followed by return value details, and then an explicit usage handoff. Every sentence earns its place, and the skill bundle examples help the agent understand the domain without padding.

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 no-parameter read-only listing tool, the description is complete: it states what is returned, the context for calling it, the recommended follow-up action, and cost implications. No required information appears missing for an agent to correctly invoke and use this tool.

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 there are no parameter semantics to document; the schema and signal data fully cover this. The description appropriately focuses on behavior and usage rather than empty parameter documentation.

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: 'List all skill bundles' with a precise definition of what a skill bundle is and what the call returns (description and member tool names). This clearly differentiates it from the many list_* sibling tools that enumerate concrete resources like flows, apps, or connections.

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 instructs when to use it: 'Call this first when you are unsure which tools apply to a request.' It also tells the agent exactly what to do next, calling tool_search with 'skill:<name>', and notes the operation is non-billable. This leaves no ambiguity about its role versus alternatives.

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