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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful domain context about what a skill is, but does not describe the return format, ordering, pagination, or whether all skills are shown.

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 two compact sentences, front-loads the purpose, and uses the final sentence only to point to the natural follow-up tool. No sentence 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with full annotation coverage, the description is nearly complete. The main remaining gap is that it does not explicitly state that it returns a list of skills, though 'Show' implies this.

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 has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and nothing in the description undermines that.

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: 'Show the user's PopNow skills', and defines them as saved ways of working with steps, models, and checks. It is clear, but does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling find_skills or list_my_recipes.

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 gives clear usage context by framing this as listing the user's own skills and explicitly routes detailed reading to use_my_skill. It does not state when to use find_skills or list_my_recipes instead, so exclusions are missing.

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