list_skills

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the exact source files it lists, that it includes descriptions, and that it is a listing operation rather than a mutation. It does not state read-only behavior explicitly, but 'Lista' and the file pattern make the non-destructive nature clear.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the action, specifies the source location, states what fields are included, and explains the purpose. Every phrase earns its place with no redundancy.

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 parameterless listing tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it tells an agent what will be listed, where it comes from, what metadata is included, and why the tool should be used. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter details, and the empty input schema already communicates that no arguments are needed.

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 states a specific verb ('Lista'), a clear resource ('skills'), and a precise source pattern ('skills/*.md'). It also says the listing includes each skill's description and names the purpose ('para decidir cuál aplica'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_skill.

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 provides clear usage context: use this tool to review available skills and their descriptions when deciding which skill to apply. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or contrast it with get_skill, but the intended decision-making scenario is evident.

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