list_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'with pagination,' which is already evident from the schema's page and pageSize properties, and provides no additional behavioral context such as return format, ordering, or potential side effects. The description is too terse to fully inform the agent about what to expect.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any unnecessary words. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 simple two-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but lacks details on the return structure or any ordering/filtering behavior. It is minimally sufficient but leaves gaps about the actual response shape.

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 schema has full coverage (100%) with clear descriptions for both page and pageSize, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List all available skills from skills.sh with pagination.' It uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('skills from skills.sh'), and specifies scope ('all'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_skills that are for targeted lookups.

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 phrase 'List all available' implies use when you need the full catalog rather than searching for specific skills, providing a subtle usage hint. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or an alternative tool, leaving the guidance somewhat implicit.

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