agent-skill-loader

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: persistence to skill-paths.json and no-restart requirement, which are valuable beyond the basic operation. However, it doesn't mention permission requirements, error conditions, or what happens with invalid paths.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place. The first sentence states the core functionality and key constraint, while the second provides important implementation detail about persistence.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (CRUD-like operations), no annotations, and no output schema, the description does well by covering persistence and no-restart behavior. However, it could better address error handling or return values since there's no output schema to compensate.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by clarifying that 'path' is absolute and not required for 'list', but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides.

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 the specific actions (add, remove, list) and the resource (dynamic skill search paths) with explicit scope (without restarting the server). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_skills by focusing on search path management rather than skill listing.

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 clear context about when to use this tool (for managing search paths without server restart) and mentions persistence to a specific file. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives among siblings like debug_info or install_skill.

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