get_skill_by_id_api_v1_skills_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action and resource. It does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication requirements, or response shape (though output schema exists). The description adds no value beyond the name.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-specified and provides no substantive information. Conciseness should not sacrifice clarity; here it introduces ambiguity.

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 complexity of sibling tools and the presence of an output schema, the description lacks context about how this tool fits into the CRUD operations for skills. It does not help the agent differentiate from similar read tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so parameter 'id' lacks any description in both schema and tool description. The description does not clarify the parameter beyond its name, failing to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 Skill By Id' is a tautology, restating the tool name without adding any additional information. It does not distinguish the tool's purpose from siblings like 'get_skills' or 'get_skill_list'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as 'get_skills' (list all) or 'get_skill_list'. There are no context clues for optimal usage.

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