skill_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains that skills are pulled live from GitHub and lists the return fields. It does not discuss authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only list tool on a public repo, this is adequate.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no fluff. Every sentence 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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description provides complete information about the output structure (name, slug, description, trigger phrases, reference files) and the source (GitHub repo). It also explains the caching behavior via the refresh parameter.

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 input schema has full coverage of the single parameter 'refresh' with its own description. The tool description adds context about bypassing cache and live fetching, but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the 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 that the tool lists all Agent Skills from the skills repo. It specifies the default repo, what each entry includes (name, slug, description with trigger phrases, reference files), and distinguishes from siblings by advising to call this first before applying a skill.

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 explicitly advises to 'Call this first to discover which skills exist before applying one,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling tools imply alternatives like skill_get for specific skills.

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