Get core GodPrompt skill

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations: it specifies the approximate size (~11KB), the content scope (6-phase protocol, Three Iron Laws, task auto-classification), and the progressive-disclosure pattern. Annotations already cover the safety profile (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), so the additional content description is a meaningful supplement.

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 with no waste: the primary return value is front-loaded, followed by size and content details, and then clear action guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 parameterless retrieval tool with a well-covered annotation set, the description is fully complete. It states what is returned (SKILL.md), what it contains, how large it is, and when to load it. No missing information is needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 and schema coverage is effectively complete, so the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline of 4 for parameterless tools applies, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related content.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns SKILL.md') and clearly identifies the resource as the core protocol to be loaded on every message. It differentiates itself from sibling tools by noting this is the lean base context and the starting point for progressive disclosure, so an agent can distinguish it from get_protocols or get_god_prompt.

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 explicit usage context: load this on every message and start here for progressive disclosure. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'always load this first' guidance is sufficient for a zero-parameter retrieval tool.

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