skill.list

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

The annotation already marks readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable context by explicitly stating the tool lists skills 'without invoking or executing them'. This reassures the agent that the operation is safe and has no side effects beyond enumeration.

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?

A single sentence that conveys the core behavior and a key safety trait without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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 is simple and the read-only annotation covers safety, but the single parameter source_id is completely unexplained and no return format is described. For a basic list operation this is minimally adequate, but the parameter gap prevents full completeness.

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 mention source_id at all. With no schema-level explanation and no compensation in the description, the agent has no guidance on what source_id means or how it affects the list.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List installed server-side skills'. It clearly states what the tool does and differentiates it from siblings like skill.search and skill.read by focusing on listing installed skills rather than searching or reading content.

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 description makes the use case clear: use this when you need to enumerate installed server-side skills. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools for other scenarios, but the intended context is obvious and no misleading guidance is present.

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