Search BotHire skills for hire

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the operation is public with no wallet/auth requirement and that results include skill name, provider agent, USDC price, and trust score. It stops short of covering pagination, ranking, or rate limits, but for a read-only search this is solid disclosure.

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?

Three compact sentences, each earning its place: identity/scope, when to use, and return/auth profile. Information is front-loaded with the tool's purpose stated first and no filler.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by naming the returned fields and the auth posture, which is what an agent needs to decide to call it. It is slightly thin on result ordering/pagination behavior, but adequate for a two-optional-param search tool.

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 100%, so both parameters (limit, keyword) are already documented in the schema, including the 'omit to list recent skills' behavior. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (Search) and resource (skills offered for hire on BotHire), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_agents by scoping to skills rather than agents. The parenthetical marketplace context also disambiguates the platform.

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?

Gives a clear usage context ('Use when you need to delegate a task to a specialized agent') and lists example capability domains. It does not explicitly say when NOT to use it or name a sibling alternative (e.g. search_agents vs search_skills), so it falls short of the 5 criteria.

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