get_skill

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the tool fetches details. It does not mention read-only guarantees, not-found behavior, authentication requirements, or any side effects, leaving meaningful uncertainty for a zero-annotation 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a minimal parameter note. The Args block somewhat duplicates the schema, but the overall structure is clean and free of filler.

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 simple one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the essential call information is present. However, with no annotations and no sibling differentiation, an agent lacks guidance on failure modes and when this tool is preferable to search_skills. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 provides no description for slug, so the description's 'The skill's unique identifier' adds necessary semantic meaning beyond the bare string type. It could explain slug format or how to find the slug, but for a single parameter this is reasonably sufficient.

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 states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('full details for a specific skill') and identifies the lookup key as the slug. It implies a distinction from search_skills, but it does not explicitly name or contrast sibling tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use get_skill versus search_skills or get_tool. The only implied condition is that the caller already knows the slug, but there are no alternatives, exclusions, or context cues to help an agent select this tool deliberately.

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