list_shared_skills

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.