List Skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation returns names/descriptions and supports pagination, implying a read-only list operation. However, it does not explicitly state lack of side effects, ordering behavior, or whether the list spans all stores or a current context.

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 with no filler. It conveys the resource, the returned data, and the pagination capability efficiently.

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 simple two-parameter list operation with an output schema present, the description covers the core purpose. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over sibling list/use/write tools, and omits context about scope or limitations, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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%, so the description must compensate for limit and offset. It merely says 'with pagination,' which hints at the parameters but does not explain their meaning, defaults, maximum values, or interaction. The parameter names are somewhat self-evident, but the description adds minimal value beyond the 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 uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('skills'), and states the exact payload ('qualified names and descriptions'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_stores by the resource type and from mutating siblings like write_skill/use_skill by the read-only list action.

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?

No usage context is provided beyond pagination. The description does not say when to call list_skills versus alternatives such as list_stores, use_skill, or write_skill, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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