get_skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description is purely functional and gives no behavioral context—no mention of what's returned if not found, error behavior, whether the skill is required to exist, or return format. This is minimal.

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?

A single short sentence that fully states the purpose. No wasted words, efficiently front-loaded. Appropriate minimal length for a single-parameter getter tool.

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 single-ID retrieval tool with one fully-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is arguably adequate—there's little complexity to explain. However, given no annotations and no mention of error/not-found behavior or return content, a slightly fuller description could help.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter 'id' is documented in the schema as 'エントリID (UUID)'. The description adds nothing beyond the schema since it just references the ID without additional format or semantics context. Baseline 3 applies 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?

The description states the tool fetches a skill by ID, with a clear verb (取得/get) and resource (スキル/skill). It distinguishes from siblings like list_skills (retrieval of a single resource vs listing) and create_skill/update_skill/delete_skill (mutations). However, the differentiation is mild since it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 implies this is a single-record retrieval tool (by ID), distinguishing it from list_skills. But it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives, or note any prerequisites (e.g., the ID must reference an existing skill). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance beyond the purpose.

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