fetch_skill_rule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by specifying exactly what is returned (full markdown content and nested rule guidelines), which is beyond the annotations. It does not claim any side effects, and the read-only nature is consistent.

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, concise sentence of 12 words. It is front-loaded with the verb and clearly states the output. No unnecessary words or repetition; every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description is quite complete given the presence of an output schema (which presumably explains the return format) and annotations covering safety. It does not mention error behavior (e.g., missing skill), but that is likely handled by the output schema. Overall, adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema provides a clear description for skill_name. The tool description does not add any additional meaning to the parameter, so it relies on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already documents the parameter fully.

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 specific verb 'Fetch' and the resource (full markdown content and nested rule guidelines of a skill). It distinguishes this from list_skills, which likely only provides an overview. The purpose is unambiguous and distinct from its sibling.

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 usage context is implied by the description and the presence of list_skills as a sibling, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus list_skills. No exclusions or alternative conditions are mentioned, so guidance is only implicit.

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