search_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add useful behavior details: 'public' registry, 'hybrid keyword/semantic search', and the recommended sort being 'SkillScore v2'. But it does not mention side effects, authentication needs beyond public access, pagination behavior, or what happens with empty results.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clean Args block. Every line adds value, the sort options are compactly listed, and there is no filler or repetition of schema defaults.

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?

The tool has a moderately sized parameter set and an output schema, so return values do not need to be described. The description covers all parameters, scope, and key behaviors. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly stating the relationship to sibling tools, but it remains sufficient for correct invocation.

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 fully compensates by documenting every parameter: query ('hybrid keyword/semantic'), category ('optional' with examples), sort (complete list with default), and limit ('Max results 1-50'). This adds meaning well beyond the bare schema property names.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search the public DecimalAI skills registry.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_skill and get_leaderboard, which retrieve specific entities rather than perform a registry-wide search.

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 search intent is implied by the tool name and opening line, and the parameter docs clarify what filtering/sorting can do. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose search_skills over get_skill, nor any mention of 'use this to find skills, then get_skill for details.'

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