list_skills

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool lists skills shipped with comfyui-mcp and notes that Claude loads these natively but the tool gives the same knowledge to any MCP client. While it doesn't explicitly state read-only, the nature of listing implies no side effects. The description could specify return format more explicitly.

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 paragraph that conveys all necessary information without excessive verbosity. However, it includes a minor redundancy ('Claude loads these natively; this tool gives the SAME knowledge to any MCP client') that could be trimmed slightly for tighter conciseness.

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 adequately explains the return content ('name + description for each') and provides context about the encoding of per-family expertise. It is complete enough for a list tool with no parameters.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns ('name + description for each') and providing example content, which is meaningful context beyond the empty schema.

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 explicitly states the tool lists bundled ComfyUI model-family and workflow skills, with examples of content (e.g., 'krea2-txt2img: native krea2 CLIPLoader...'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'read_skill' and 'list_packs' by specifying when to call each.

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 explicit guidance: 'Call this BEFORE hand-building a workflow from scratch... if a matching skill exists, read its full guidance with read_skill(name) and prefer a ready installer pack (see list_packs) over a generic graph.' This clearly states when to use the tool and what alternatives exist.

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