get_skill

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses that query returns best match and alternates, include_resources controls inlining, and agent applies AutoVault transforms. However, it does not mention behavior if both name and query are provided, or error handling.

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 sentences cover the main functionality efficiently. The structure mixes parameter explanations within usage, but no word wasted. Could be more organized by grouping parameter descriptions.

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?

With 0% schema description, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the two modes and most parameters. However, it misses the top_k parameter, does not describe the output format, and lacks error behavior. Adequate but not complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It explains name, query, include_resources, and agent clearly, but omits top_k completely despite its exclusiveMinimum and maximum constraints. 4 out of 5 parameters are described, but the missing one is a gap.

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?

Description clearly states the verb (Find/load) and resource (installed skills). It distinguishes between exact match by name and search by query, and mentions optional parameters. Among siblings focused on mutation, it stands out as the retrieval tool.

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 implies when to use name vs query, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings like propose_skill or delete_skill. No prerequisites or when-not conditions are provided.

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