skill_execute

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't disclose any side effects, whether execution is synchronous, error handling, or permissions. 'Execute' implies an action, but the description gives no context about what happens during execution or what output to expect.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient, but arguably too terse for a tool with multiple parameters. Still, for what it conveys, it is concise.

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?

The tool has no annotations and no output schema, and the description is minimal. It doesn't cover return values, exceptions, or whether the skill runs asynchronously. For an execution tool, this is a significant gap, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'given input', which is redundant with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles semantic load.

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 uses a specific verb 'Execute' with a clear resource 'a skill' and mentions the required input. It distinguishes from sibling tools like skill_activate or skill_deactivate by implying a one-time run rather than activation state. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like skill_activate or command_execute. The description only states what it does, with no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred scenarios.

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