validate_skill

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. States it returns a list of issues and a valid flag. Lacks details on side effects (none expected), permissions, or performance, but adequate for a simple validation tool.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and usage, then return details. Every sentence 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?

Complete for a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema. Explains what it validates, when to call, and what it returns. No missing information given the tool's simplicity.

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% with one parameter described as 'Path to the SKILL.md file or directory...' and an example. Description adds no further parameter meaning beyond that, but baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the verb (validate) and resource (SKILL.md file), and specifies aspects checked: structure, naming conventions, completeness. Distinguishes from siblings like run_skill_test which runs tests instead of validating structure.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: 'after writing or editing a SKILL.md before running tests.' Provides clear timing context, though doesn't explicitly list exclusions or alternatives beyond the implied sequencing.

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