List skgate features

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so "Read-only and offline" is largely redundant. The description does add non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: the error semantics for an unrecognized area and the exact shape of the returned object.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the default behavior ("Without an area it returns every feature"), then the return shape, then the error case. Dense but every sentence carries information; the enum parenthetical is long but 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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be spelled out, yet the description still summarizes them, and it covers the default, the enum meanings, and the error path. For a zero-required-parameter read tool this is essentially complete, with only sibling disambiguation missing.

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 100% and the enum is already documented, but the description goes further by explaining what each enum value actually covers (mcp = MCP servers and tools, llm_proxy = OpenAI-compatible API, providers, aliases and keys, etc.). That is real added meaning an agent cannot get from the schema alone.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List what skgate does, one entry per feature") and immediately scopes it with the optional area filter. It is clear what the tool returns, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling tools 'about' and 'config_help', which plausibly also describe product information.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use guidance for the one decision point: omit the area to get everything, pass an area to narrow. It also documents the failure mode (unknown area is an error naming valid values). It stops short of routing the agent away from the overlapping siblings about/config_help.

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