get_skills
Retrieve technical skills grouped by category to assess a candidate's qualifications.
Instructions
Technical skills grouped by category.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Retrieve technical skills grouped by category to assess a candidate's qualifications.
Technical skills grouped by category.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only mentions the output format (grouped by category) but omits behavioral details such as whether it is read-only, authentication needs, or behavior when no skills exist.
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 concise with a single sentence. While efficient, it could include more context without being verbose.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description adequately conveys what it returns. However, it could benefit from specifying categories or typical usage.
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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. Baseline score of 4 applies.
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 clearly states that the tool returns technical skills grouped by category, distinguishing it from sibling tools that return other resume sections like contact or education.
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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives like has_skill or search_background.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jason-bourne-gg/my-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server