list_skills

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds behavioral value by disclosing that the result is a catalog grouped by category, and lists the categories. It does not mention the optional config parameter, but the read-only and list-oriented behavior is well conveyed.

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 compact, front-loaded with the primary function, and all sentences serve a purpose. The category list and get_skill() pointer are useful, though the phrase 'battle-tested, multi-step marketing workflows' is slightly promotional without adding operational detail.

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 listing tool, it communicates purpose, categories, and the logical next step. However, the unexplained config parameter and the lack of any output schema details mean an agent doesn't know the exact catalog structure or how config modifies the listing.

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 optional parameter 'config' with zero description and 0% schema description coverage. The description completely ignores this parameter, leaving agents with no guidance on what config accepts or how it affects the returned catalog.

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 opens with 'List all available Unilytics workflow skills', using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by framing this as the discovery entry point and directing to get_skill() for the full recipe.

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?

It gives clear usage context: first list skills to get a catalog, then use get_skill() to load the full workflow recipe. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the explicit pointer to get_skill() and the category list provide practical guidance.

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