get_skill

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the tool is free and requires no credentials, implying a read-only retrieval. But it does not explicitly confirm no side effects or describe the full behavior beyond retrieval.

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: a single clear purpose sentence, followed by a list of valid skills, the special 'list' case, and a note about freeness. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the simple one-parameter input and existence of an output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns and how to use it. It could briefly mention the output structure, but that is covered by the schema.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that the 'name' parameter accepts specific skill names or 'list' to enumerate all skills. This adds significant semantic meaning beyond the raw 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 the tool retrieves an SEO workflow skill with step-by-step methodology and CTR models. It lists specific skills and the special 'list' option, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like seo_agent or seo_checklist.

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?

It provides clear guidance on usage: lists valid skill names, explains how to see all available skills via 'list', and clarifies that no API key or credits are needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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