Skill catalog

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

Annotations already supply readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds value by clarifying 'offline and read-only' and explaining the alias-card behavior. No contradiction with annotations; the only minor gap is no detail about result ordering or size, but the output schema covers return structure.

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?

Three short, information-dense sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the follow-up tool reference and optional parameter hint each occupy their own meaningful sentence.

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, read-only catalog tool with one optional boolean parameter and a provided output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns, how to use it in the broader discovery flow, and its safety/offline characteristics.

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% and the include_aliases parameter is already well-documented in the schema. The description mostly restates the same meaning ('pass include_aliases to also see alias cards'), adding little beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('the skills mcptoon indexes'), and the output shape (slug and one-line description). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling mcptoon_resolve_skills by framing itself as the discovery step before resolution.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to read this once to learn available skills and then resolve the target with mcptoon_resolve_skills. It also gives the optional include_aliases usage condition, making the intended workflow unambiguous.

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