discover_skills

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

With no annotations, the description must stand alone. It implies a read operation but omits details like pagination behavior, result limits, or whether the catalog is exhaustive. The mention of '252' is helpful but lacks clarity on dynamic updates.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and result, and contains no unnecessary words. It is efficient and easy to parse.

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 no output schema, the description lists the return fields (name, description, price, featured status) and the total count, which is helpful. It lacks only a note on possible filtering behavior and output format (e.g., array). This is sufficient for a simple listing 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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description of the optional 'category' filter. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists all 252 available AI skills with specific fields (name, description, price, featured status), using a strong verb and resource identification. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on individual skills.

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 gives a brief usage hint ('Use this to browse the full catalog') but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives among the many sibling tools like get_skill_detail for detailed views.

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