sf_skills_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for explaining behavior. It mentions 'remote' implying network calls, and 'Search' implies read-only, but it does not state whether any data is modified, whether there are rate limits, or what exactly gets returned. This is adequate but not rich.

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 communicates the core purpose and key benefit. There is no wasted text or unnecessary details.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how to construct or limit a query, what includeContentSearch does, or what the return format looks like. The agent would likely need additional information to invoke this tool correctly for anything beyond a trivial default query.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (query, limit, includeContentSearch). The names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no additional meaning, forcing the agent to rely on schema field names alone.

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 a specific verb ('Search'), the resource ('remote Salesforce skills from forcedotcom/sf-skills'), and an important distinction from local operations ('without local clone'). This effectively differentiates it from the many sibling tools that operate on Salesforce org data.

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 'without local clone' provides useful guidance on when to use this tool—instead of cloning the repository locally. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like sf_skills_get or sf_skills_list_domains, so it stops short of full comparative guidance.

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