find_skill

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently explains the progressive loading behavior and how each level works. However, it does not disclose potential edge cases, such as behavior when no skills match or authentication requirements.

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 well-structured with bullet points for clarity, but it is somewhat lengthy. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise without losing meaning.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, progressive system), the description covers the main usage patterns. With an output schema present, return value details are not needed. It lacks mention of error handling or prerequisites, but otherwise is fairly complete.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema by explaining how parameters relate to the three layers (e.g., task_description for level=1, category for level=2, skill_id for level=3). This contextualizes parameter usage effectively, despite 100% schema coverage.

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's purpose: to find ecosystem skills/plugins using a three-layer progressive loading system. It uses specific verbs ('find') and resource ('ecosystem skills/plugins'), and distinguishes from siblings like ecosystem_search by detailing the unique layered approach.

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 implies usage scenarios through the three layers (quick recommend, category browse, full detail) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ecosystem_search or unified_search. No exclusions or when-not guidance are provided.

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