skim_run

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains behavioral traits: output is compact, deduped, nothing lost, returns exit_code and token report, and runs on the user's machine. No contradictions.

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 fairly concise but could be tighter. It has two paragraphs with useful information, though some redundancy exists (e.g., 'compact' repeated).

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main purpose and behavior but lacks parameter details and output structure beyond exit_code and token report. Error handling or security considerations are omitted.

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 coverage is 0%; the description does not add meaning to the parameters. It mentions 'command' but lacks details on format or timeout, leaving the agent uninformed about parameter specifics.

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 runs a shell command and returns a compact, expandable view. It distinguishes from siblings like skim_expand, which is mentioned for expanding output.

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 gives guidance for verbose commands (test runs, builds, npm/pip, big logs) and mentions skim_expand for expansion, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternative tools for non-verbose cases.

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