skill_list

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

The word 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose the default behavior regarding enabled_only (default false) or scope (default all), nor does it describe what the list contains. There are no annotations to fall back on, so the description carries the burden but only vaguely covers behavioral details.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately small and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 listing tool, the description plus the schema provides a complete picture: the action is clear, the filters are documented, and no output schema is needed for basic use. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit mention of return contents, but it is not a significant omission.

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 fully documents all three parameters (tag, scope, enabled_only). The description adds no parameter information, but the baseline for high coverage is 3, which is appropriate here.

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 'List all available skills' uses a clear verb (list) and resource (skills), and it distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like skill_get, skill_execute, and skill_stats. It unambiguously states the core function.

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?

The description implies usage for enumerating skills but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. Since listing is self-evident and sibling tools are distinct by name, the usage is implicitly clear but not explicitly stated.

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