list_skills

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

Annotations are absent, so description carries the burden. It mentions fuzzy search and return fields but omits details like pagination, ordering, or read-only nature. Provides minimal behavioral context beyond what is obvious.

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?

Single sentence that is concise, front-loaded, and contains no superfluous information. Every word adds value.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and returns. Could mention if results are paginated or limited, but not critical.

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% (query parameter described). The tool description does not add semantic value beyond the schema; it restates the same information. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool lists local skills with fuzzy search support and specifies return fields (name, path, hash). It differentiates from sibling tools like analyze_skill or compare_skills, though it does not explicitly mention distinctions.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_patterns or list_templates). The description implies usage for listing skills but lacks contextual exclusions or scenarios.

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