skill_pavilion

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

With no annotations, the description bears full transparency burden. It explains the three modes (list/show/export) and covers parameter effects: output_dir required for export, force overwrites. However, it omits details like permissions, rate limits, or side effects on existing files.

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 extremely concise: a one-line purpose statement followed by a compact args listing. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, and the critical action modes are front-loaded.

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 output schema exists, return value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers all parameters, modes, and constraints (e.g., output_dir required for export). Minor omission: could clarify that 'list' doesn't need skill_name, but it's implied.

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 0%, but the description fully documents all 4 parameters: action (valid values), skill_name (association with show/export), output_dir (required for export), force (overwrite behavior). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's default values and titles.

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 operates on portable Agent Skill bundles with specific verbs: list, show, or export. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like forge_agent which create agents, making the purpose distinct 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply lists actions without context about appropriate scenarios or exclusions, which is insufficient for an AI agent to decide between sibling tools.

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