mcp-skills

installSkill

Install reusable instruction sets from skills.sh or GitHub repositories to extend AI agent capabilities through structured skill discovery and lifecycle management.

Instructions

Instala un skill desde skills.sh o GitHub usando su ID (owner/repo@skill)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "skillId": "<skillId>"
    },
    "name": "installSkill"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skillId`	Yes	ID del skill a instalar, ej: owner/repo@skill

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.9Mar 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It lacks details on permissions needed, side effects (e.g., if installation affects system state), error handling, or confirmation steps. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential details (sources, ID format) without unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what happens after installation, success/failure indicators, or behavioral traits like dependencies or system impacts, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the skillId parameter with an example. The description adds minimal value by mentioning the ID format and sources, but doesn't provide additional syntax, validation rules, or context beyond what the schema offers.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Instala') and resource ('un skill'), specifying it installs a skill from skills.sh or GitHub using an ID format. It distinguishes from siblings like uninstallSkill and updateSkill by focusing on installation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from selectSkill which might involve selection rather than installation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like selectSkill or findSkills. The description mentions the source (skills.sh or GitHub) but doesn't specify prerequisites, conditions for use, or when other tools might be more appropriate.

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

Deploy Server