civil3d_skills

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies read-only behavior through 'Browse and read' and actions like list/search/get, but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive. The lack of destructive mentions is acceptable for a clearly read-only tool.

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 two sentences, no wasted words, and front-loads the purpose. It efficiently covers actions, usage, and relationship to sibling tools.

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 description adequately covers the tool's purpose and actions, references sibling tools for execution, and mentions that 'get' returns a full code template. However, it lacks details about output format or behavior for empty results, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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. The description adds context by explaining the three actions and their mapping to parameters, but does not provide significant detail beyond what the schema already describes.

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 browses and reads Civil 3D code skills, lists three specific actions (list, search, get), and distinguishes from sibling execution tools by noting that skills can be adapted and executed via civil3d_execute or civil3d_query.

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 context for using the tool (to find and read skills) and implicitly contrasts with execution tools, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools beyond mentioning civil3d_execute and civil3d_query.

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