Inspect AI Pack execution skills

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Return' and 'before a run' imply a non-mutating inspection operation, and the description names the specific data categories returned. However, it does not explicitly state that no run is triggered or that no modifications occur, nor does it mention permission or error behavior.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loads the action word 'Return', and packs the tool's scope into a compact list. Every part of the sentence adds 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 low-complexity tool with only one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential return categories and the pre-run usage context. It does not describe the output structure, but the listed return areas are enough for an agent to determine whether this tool fits its needs.

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 100% for the single required parameter productId, and the schema describes it as a UUID product id. The tool description adds no further parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and identifies a precise resource: Pack-declared hosted skills, ephemeral attachment policy, and user-controlled MCP/API extensions. This content profile is distinct from sibling tools like get_ai_pack_report or run_ai_pack, so an agent can tell what this tool uniquely provides.

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 'before a run' gives a clear temporal context for when to use this tool, distinguishing it from run-executing or post-run reporting tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the pre-run context is sufficient guidance for selection.

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