list_skills

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is reinforced by 'Read-only manifest view,' and the description adds behavioral details such as taking no arguments and returning a count plus a skills array. Since there is no output schema, explaining the return shape is valuable context beyond the annotation.

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 three sentences are tightly packed: definition, usage context, and behavior/return. No waste or redundancy; each clause serves a purpose.

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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool, the description covers what it returns, when to use it, and its read-only nature. Given the lack of output schema, the return value explanation is sufficient, and the tool's simplicity means no further context is needed.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, and the input schema is an empty object. The description explicitly notes 'takes no arguments,' and with no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies.

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 'Enumerate every skill the server currently exposes as a prompt,' clearly identifying the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling listing tools like list_commands and list_rules by focusing specifically on skills. The mention of name, description, and source further clarifies the scope.

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?

It explicitly states when to use: 'Use to discover which skills are available before suggesting or invoking one.' However, it does not mention when not to use or explicitly compare with alternative list tools, so it falls short of full exclusion guidance.

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