skill-unlearn

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

It discloses the alias behavior, the fixed 'sectionType: skill', and the deprecation status, which go beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe what data is affected by unlearning or what consequences the destructive hint entails.

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 exceptionally terse: two sentences carry the alias identity, fixed parameter behavior, deprecation, and removal version. There is no redundant language.

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 deprecated tool meant as a shorthand alias, the description is enough to identify and avoid it, but it leaves destructive behavior, parameter semantics, and output behavior unexplained. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 does not explain 'kbid' or 'docid' or clarify optionality, so the agent must infer meaning from names alone. The hidden 'sectionType: skill' is helpful but does not compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 this is a shorthand for 'unlearn' with 'sectionType: skill', which clearly identifies the resource type and distinguishes it from generic and agent-scoped unlearn/skill tools. The title 'Unlearn Skill' reinforces the verb-resource pair.

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?

Describing the tool as deprecated and as shorthand implies the canonical 'unlearn' tool should be preferred, but it does not explicitly tell the agent when to use this tool versus other alternatives. It provides lifecycle guidance but not clear selection conditions.

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