get_skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core operation but does not mention response format, error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), or whether the returned object includes full details. For a simple getter this is acceptable, but additional context would improve transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to meaning, making it appropriately concise for a simple getter.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It could benefit from a note about the return value or a pointer to sibling tools, but for a basic get-by-ID operation, it provides sufficient context.

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 schema has one parameter (skillId) with a description, giving 100% schema coverage. Per guidelines, this sets a baseline of 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the score remains at baseline.

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 'Get a specific skill by ID' uses a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('skill'), and scope ('by ID'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_skills (which likely lists all skills) and search_skills. It is direct and unambiguous.

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 the use case: when you have a skill ID and need that specific skill. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., use get_skills to list all skills or search_skills for filtering), so guidance on when to use it versus siblings is only implied, not stated.

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