add_skill_to_folder

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

Annotations are minimal (only a title), so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the critical side-effect that no skill files are copied, only a reference is recorded. While it doesn't cover return values or error handling, the key behavioral trait is well-communicated.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, a clarifying note, and an Args section. It is slightly verbose but avoids redundancy and stays focused on essential information.

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 tool, the description is adequate: it explains purpose, behavior, and parameter sources. It omits the optional config and does not describe the return value, but these are minor gaps given the tool's straightforward nature and lack of output schema.

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 description explains the two required parameters (folder_id and skill_id) with sources, but the schema also includes an optional 'config' parameter that is completely unaddressed. With 0% schema description coverage, this leaves a gap for the config parameter, though it is likely not essential.

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's action ('Attach a skill to a folder by reference') and explains the key nuance that it does NOT copy skill files. This fully communicates the purpose and distinguishes it from any potential copy operation, making the purpose 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 provides clear context on how to obtain the required IDs (list_folders for folder_id, skill store for skill_id) and clarifies the use case (recording a reference rather than copying). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for correct invocation.

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