skill_run

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds context by listing the structured response elements (ANNOUNCE, GOAL, etc.), but does not detail side effects or auth needs, which is acceptable given the annotations cover safety.

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 two concise sentences plus a tip, all front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 6 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description covers the output structure in detail, provides usage tips, and states the tool's purpose. It is nearly complete, though a brief note on return format (already partially given) could further enhance completeness.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema provides, but the overall context 'with your task context' is minimally additive.

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 it invokes a DPS SuperSkill v5.2.1 with task context, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by including a tip to use skill_list first if unsure, contrasting with listing or reading skills.

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?

Explicit tips are provided: 'Run skill_list first if unsure which skill to use' and 'Run complexity-gate before other skills for software tasks,' offering clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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