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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. Description adds valuable detail about the content returned (XML and/or guidance text), which is beyond annotations and helps the agent know what to expect.

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?

Single, dense sentence that packs action, content, purpose, and usage hint without waste. Front-loaded with the core operation.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation. Description covers the action, input source, and intended use. Could add an explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, but that's minor given the overall clarity.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It provides a source for valid values ('Use ids from list_skills') but does not explicitly define what skill_id represents (e.g., unique identifier). It gives a useful pointer but lacks full semantics.

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?

Clear verb 'load' with specific resource 'skill' and scope 'full body'. States content (XML workflow and/or guidance text) and purpose ('to mimic its structure when building'). Differentiates from list_skills by referencing it for IDs and from other load tools by specifying the skill resource.

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 to 'Use ids from list_skills', establishing a prerequisite and a related tool. Implies usage when building workflows to mimic structure. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives (e.g., list_skills for enumeration), but the context is clear enough.

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