skill

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It helpfully states that the output contains skill instructions and file references, which is useful since there is no output schema. However, it does not mention side effects, read-only nature, or error behavior for invalid names, leaving some gaps.

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 consists of three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, output content, and name constraint. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no fluff 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what the output contains, and the name constraint. It does not discuss error handling or prerequisite discovery steps, but these are minor for a loading tool.

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 describes 'name' simply as 'Skill name', which is tautological. The description adds the crucial constraint that the name must match a discovered skill, providing meaningful semantics beyond the schema. This exceeds the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 starts with a specific verb 'Load' and a resource 'discovered specialized skill', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like file operations or web searches. The mention of 'discovered' further refines the tool's unique role.

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 clearly implies the context: use this when you need to load a discovered skill. It states the prerequisite that the name must match a discovered skill, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. Given the sibling tools, the use case is clear enough.

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