Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• list_shared_skillsD
  1.8/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only restates the function name without mentioning side effects, pagination, rate limits, or any constraints. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness2/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise (6 words), but it sacrifices necessary detail. While no word is wasted, the information provided is too minimal to be useful, making it under-specified rather than concise.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the presence of sibling tools, optional parameters, and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what metadata is returned, how pagination works, or how 'category' affects results, leaving the agent with significant gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no information about the 'limit' or 'category' parameters. The agent gets no context on what the parameters mean or how to use them beyond the schema's type/default values.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose3/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'List Shared Skills Registry metadata,' which clearly indicates the action (list) and resource (shared skills registry metadata). It distinguishes from siblings like 'retrieve_shared_skill' (single item) and 'search_shared_skills' (search with criteria), but 'metadata' is vague and could be more specific.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_shared_skills' or 'describe_shared_skill.' There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without decision support.

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

• describe_shared_skillC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description should disclose key behaviors such as read-only nature or response format. It only states 'describe', which implies a read operation but offers no details about side effects or return characteristics.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks essential information that could improve agent understanding. It is not overly verbose, but it is too minimal.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the presence of similar sibling tools and the lack of output schema, the description should clarify the tool's return value and distinction from 'retrieve_shared_skill'. It fails to provide a complete picture for an AI agent to use correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  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 the 'name' parameter, its format, or how to specify the skill entry. The agent must rely solely on the parameter name 'Name' without additional guidance.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's action (describe) and resource (one skill entry from Shared Skills Registry). However, it does not differentiate from sibling 'retrieve_shared_skill', which may have similar functionality.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_shared_skills', 'search_shared_skills', or 'retrieve_shared_skill'. This lack of usage context can lead to incorrect tool selection.

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

• retrieve_shared_skillC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'checksum-bearing' but does not explain what that entails, how errors are handled, or the nature of the returned bundle.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, concise but overly brief. It lacks structure such as parameter explanations or usage examples.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what a 'source bundle' is, the purpose of the checksum, or the return format.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation for the two parameters ('name' and 'include_bundle'). Their roles remain ambiguous.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action (Retrieve) and the resource (Shared Skills Registry source bundle) with a specific qualifier (checksum-bearing). It distinguishes from siblings like describe_shared_skill and list_shared_skills, which likely return different data.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description does not specify scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives like describe_shared_skill for metadata.

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

• search_shared_skillsC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Search' implying a read operation, but does not confirm idempotency, pagination, or whether results are filtered. Critical details about side effects or data returned are missing.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, which is concise but at the expense of completeness. It could be expanded to cover key details without becoming overly long.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the lack of output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the description is severely insufficient. An agent cannot reliably use this tool without additional context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  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 the parameters 'query,' 'limit,' or 'category.' The agent has no semantic clues about how to use these parameters correctly.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'Search Shared Skills Registry metadata,' which clearly identifies the verb (search) and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_shared_skills' or 'retrieve_shared_skill' that might perform similar functions.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'list_shared_skills' for listing all skills or 'retrieve_shared_skill' for a specific one. The description lacks context on prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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

• install_shared_skillC
  2.8/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files), permissions required, or error conditions. The minimal description fails to compensate for the lack of annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the main action. However, it sacrifices valuable details that could be added without losing conciseness.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given 4 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks context about where the skill comes from, what installation entails, and any constraints, making it hard for an agent to use correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds no meaning to the parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent must rely on parameter names alone, which are insufficient for understanding purpose (e.g., 'skills_root', 'target_category').

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action (install), the resource (shared skill), and the destination (local skills directory). It effectively differentiates from sibling tools which focus on describing, listing, retrieving, and searching.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions for installation.

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