get_skillLoad a bundled skill's full SKILL.md workflow instructions by name to run that workflow with other Hermoso tools. Read-only and free.
Load a bundled skill’s full SKILL.md workflow instructions by name (from list_skills). Follow the loaded instructions to run that workflow with the other tools. Read-only, free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | bundle name from list_skills, e.g. hermoso-generate |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.161Output schema / (root)Previous value: -{
- "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "name": {
- "description": "the loaded skill bundle name",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
-}New value: +nullv0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is done. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing that the call itself costs nothing ('free') and that the returned content is instructions to be executed elsewhere rather than an action performed here.
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?
Three compact sentences, front-loaded with what is loaded, followed by the prerequisite and the follow-up action. No filler or repetition.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers source of input, return content, and intended next action. Nothing an agent needs in order to call and use it correctly is 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?
Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage; the schema already states 'bundle name from list_skills' with an example, and the description's 'by name (from list_skills)' merely echoes it. Baseline 3 for a fully documented single-param schema.
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+resource ('Load a bundled skill's full SKILL.md workflow instructions') and names the return artifact precisely, so it is unmistakably distinct from siblings save_skill and delete_skill. An agent knows exactly what it retrieves without opening the schema.
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 usage context: fetch instructions by name obtained 'from list_skills', then 'Follow the loaded instructions to run that workflow with the other tools.' The prerequisite and next step are explicit, though there is no stated when-not-to-use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.