search_skills

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds context by specifying the search targets (name or description), but does not disclose result behavior such as case sensitivity, partial matching, or return format. This is acceptable for a simple search but not overly transparent.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence that says exactly what the tool does with no filler or 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It covers the search target and field scope; only missing details about return value structure, which is acceptable when no output schema exists.

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 covers 100% of parameters, providing a baseline of 3. The description enriches the meaning of searchTerm by clarifying it matches against the skill's name or description, which goes beyond the schema's generic 'Search term'.

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 searches for skills by name or description, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools (search_actors, search_enemies, etc.) by explicitly targeting skills.

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?

Usage is implied: use when you need to find skills by name or description. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over other search tools or any exclusions, so it stops at implied context.

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