List Now Assist skill definitions to inventory available AI skills. Filter by active status or encoded queries to target specific skill sets.
List Now Assist skill definitions (requires NOW_ASSIST_ENABLED)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max records to return (default 25) | |
| query | No | Additional encoded query string | |
| active | No | Filter by active status |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.9.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds the prerequisite NOW_ASSIST_ENABLED, which is a behavioral requirement not captured in the annotations, and specifies 'definitions' to clarify the return type. This goes beyond the structured data.
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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and a key prerequisite without any fluff. Every word serves a purpose, and it is immediately scannable.
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 read-only list tool with well-documented optional parameters and annotations indicating safety and open-world behavior, the description is adequately complete. It could optionally mention what a 'definition' includes, but given the clear name and schema, the current level is sufficient.
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 already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (limit, query, active), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, and per the rubric, the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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 the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('Now Assist skill definitions'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes from the sibling tools get_now_assist_skill (single retrieval) and create_now_assist_skill (creation) through the list/get/create naming pattern.
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 a clear prerequisite ('requires NOW_ASSIST_ENABLED'), which is useful contextual guidance for when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to favor this tool over get_now_assist_skill, though the sibling list implies that distinction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.