Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agentskills-mcp

agentskills-mcp

by janacibron
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Search Skills

search_skills

Search a skill catalog by keyword across IDs, names, tags, and descriptions to find relevant skills without scanning the whole catalog. Returns ranked matches with relevance scores.

Instructions

Keyword search across skill_id, name, tags, and description. Returns ranked matches with relevance scores. Use this when the user's request names a specific intent and you want to find skills whose metadata matches — without scanning the whole catalog.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_skills"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results to return. Default 10.
queryYesKeywords to search for. Multi-word queries are scored per-token.
include_deprecatedNoIf true, include deprecated skills.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hitsYes
queryYesEchoed back for client-side correlation
totalYesTotal matches before limit applied
truncatedNoTrue if total > limit

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful behavior beyond the schema — ranking, relevance scores, and per-field matching — but never explicitly confirms this is a safe read-only operation, and says nothing about behavior when no matches are found or about result size/cost.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with what it does, then the return shape, then the usage cue. The phrase 'without scanning the whole catalog' slightly restates the usage point, but nothing else is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A low-complexity 3-parameter search tool where the output schema already covers return values, so the description need not explain results. The remaining gap is the absent read-only/permission statement, which matters little for a search but is unstated anywhere in the definition.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so limit and include_deprecated are already fully documented and the baseline is 3. The description does add genuine meaning by naming the fields the query tokenizes against, but it adds nothing about limit tuning or when to enable deprecated inclusion, so it sits at the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('keyword search across skill_id, name, tags, and description') and commits to a return shape ('ranked matches with relevance scores'). The closing clause ('without scanning the whole catalog') implicitly contrasts it with the list_* siblings, but never names list_skills or get_skill_metadata, so differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear trigger condition: use it when the request names a specific intent and you want metadata matching. The contrast with 'scanning the whole catalog' points at the browse alternative, but it does not state when-not-to-use it or name the sibling to pick instead when no clear intent exists.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools