skill_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the tool searches by name and returns a list of matching entries, which covers the core behavior and output shape. It does not detail edge behaviors like result ordering, but for a simple search tool the transparency is adequate.

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 front-loaded, information-dense sentences with no redundant filler. Every clause adds value: what the tool finds, what it returns, when to use it, and what to use instead.

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 straightforward search tool with a fully described schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, the alternative tool, and the return type. No output schema is needed, and the simple nature of the operation means nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds minimal parameter-level meaning beyond 'by name', which is already reflected in the query parameter description. A baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Search D&D 5e skills by name') and clearly states the return type ('a list of matching entries'). It also differentiates itself from omnisearch, making the tool's scope unambiguous relative to a key sibling.

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 gives an explicit condition for use ('when you know the content type') and names the alternative ('use omnisearch instead') for uncertain cases. This is strong routing guidance that helps an agent choose correctly without additional inference.

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