get_skill

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

Returns format details ({name, files: {relpath: content}}) and post-fetch behavior (installation, auto-invocation) despite no annotations. No side-effect or permission disclosure needed for a read-only fetch.

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?

Two concise sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded purpose, efficient and clear.

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?

Covers return structure, installation steps, and agent-specific behavior. Could mention how to obtain valid skill names, but overall adequate for a simple tool.

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?

Single parameter 'name' has no description in schema (0% coverage) and description adds no further guidance on valid names or sources. However, its purpose is straightforward.

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?

Clearly states 'Fetch a whole skill package' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like list_skills and put_skill by focusing on retrieval.

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?

Provides installation instructions and mentions agent applicability (any agent vs Claude with auto-invocation), giving context for when to use. Lacks explicit exclusion of alternatives.

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