github_skills_install_skill

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

The description 'download' implies writing to disk, which aligns with readOnlyHint: false but adds no further behavioral details beyond the annotations. It does not mention side effects like directory creation, permissions required, or error scenarios. Annotations already provide non-destructive and non-idempotent hints, so the description adds limited value.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it could be slightly more structured by including parameter hints, but it is not verbose.

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 installs skills to disk and has multiple parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not mention the installation process, the role of parameters, or what the output schema contains (though output schema exists but is not shown). The description lacks completeness for a mutating tool with file system impact.

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 at the top level, the description should explain key parameters. It does not mention skill_slug, destination_dir, overwrite, or preserve_repo_prefix, leaving the agent to rely solely on nested schema descriptions. The description fails to add semantic context 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 the tool downloads a skill directory from GitHub to a local folder. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_skill (retrieval) or search_skills (search), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_skill for info, suggest_skill_scaffold for creation). It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing a specific GitHub repository URL, nor does it specify when not to use it.

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