import_skill

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the high-level steps (fetch, validate, convert) but omits critical details such as the skipValidation option, return behavior, side effects, or error conditions. This is minimal disclosure.

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 a single, compact sentence that conveys the essential function without redundancy. It could benefit from slight expansion to include usage context, but as written it is appropriately 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?

The tool has three parameters and no output schema, so the description must clarify the full workflow, return value, and optional behavior. It only provides the step list, leaving gaps around skipValidation, success conditions, and what is produced by the conversion. This is insufficient for an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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 input schema covers all parameters with meaningful descriptions (identifier, outputFormat, skipValidation), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 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 name 'import_skill' plus 'Complete import workflow (fetch + validate + convert)' makes it clear this tool performs a full import sequence. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle only individual steps, though it lacks an explicit imperative verb describing the action.

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 implies this tool is used for the complete import process, as opposed to using fetch_skill, validate_skill, or convert_to_* individually. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over the alternatives or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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