Search a library of reusable patterns extracted from analyzed skills, with filters for category, tags, and success rate.
搜索模式库。从已分析技能中提取的复用模式支持搜索、分类和成功率追踪。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | 按标签筛选 | |
| limit | No | 返回条数上限 | |
| query | No | 搜索关键词（可选） | |
| category | No | 按分类筛选 (prompt_design / error_handling / performance / ...) | |
| min_success_rate | No | 最低成功率 (0-100) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description only states it supports search/classification/tracking without disclosing whether it is read-only, modifies data, or has any side effects. Behavioral traits are not addressed.
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 short sentences; front-loaded with main purpose. No wasted words, though brevity may sacrifice completeness.
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?
No output schema, yet description fails to explain return format, pagination, or how success rate tracking integrates. Incomplete for a 5-parameter search 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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add meaning beyond parameter descriptions; it only reiterates that patterns can be searched/classified/tracked.
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?
Description states 'Search pattern library' and lists capabilities (search, classify, track success rate). Clearly identifies the resource and verbs, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_skills which list skills rather than patterns.
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. Sibling tools like analyze_skill or recommend_combo are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/K-Host/skill-composer-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server