Get Skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb '获取' implies a read-only operation, and the description lists what content is returned. However, it does not explicitly disclose permissions, error behavior, or side effects, though for a simple getter this is a minor gap.

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 sentence that front-loads the main purpose, lists the returned content, and ends with a usage clause. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 low-complexity read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient: it explains what is returned, the use case, and the parameter example is in the schema. It does not need to explain return shape because the constituent parts are listed.

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 one parameter 'name' with a description and examples, giving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details, but none are needed given the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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 '获取一个 Skill 的完整定义' specifying the verb and resource, then enumerates the returned components (CoSTAR 背景、目标、风格、语气、受众、规则、示例和 Instructions 正文). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like soloflow_run_skill or soloflow_list_skills.

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 states when to use it: '当你需要了解某个 Skill 的详细内容时使用' (use when you need to understand a Skill's detailed contents). It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the use case is clear.

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