get_skill

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly conveys the read-only nature via 'Retrieve' and discloses the optional section-filtering behavior. It doesn't cover error cases or return format, but for a simple read operation this is adequate.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource. The example section list adds immediate clarity without unnecessary verbosity.

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 tool is simple (2 params, no output schema), and the description adequately covers what it does, including the optional section behavior. A mention of return format could enhance completeness, but it's not critical given the description's clarity.

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%—both parameters have descriptions, and 'section' lists aliases. The description adds context by exemplifying section values ('auth', 'rate-limits') and explaining that the section returns 'just that part', which slightly enhances the schema but doesn't carry the burden.

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?

Description states a specific action ('Retrieve') and resource ('ClawSkills skill doc') with a clear lookup method ('by name (slug)'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_skills and search_skills, which are for discovery, and from get_playbook, which targets a different resource.

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 phrase 'by name (slug)' implies the tool should be used when the caller already knows the skill's slug. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like 'use search_skills if you don't know the slug' or list_skills for browsing, leaving the usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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