refresh_skills

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Refresh' is vague about side effects: whether it reloads from disk, invalidates a cache, mutates stored data, or is idempotent. The description focuses on the trigger rather than what actually happens during refresh.

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 sentence delivers the action and usage context with no filler. The verb is front-loaded and the guidance is compact.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema refresh utility, the description covers the main decision point: use it after adding skills. It could be slightly more complete by noting whether the refresh affects only the cached list or also individual skill details, but 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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The description appropriately adds the only actionable context needed: when to invoke the refresh.

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-resource pair ('Refresh the skill list') and adds a concrete trigger ('use after adding new skills'). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_skills or run_skill, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 parenthetical 'use after adding new skills' provides explicit timing guidance for when to call this tool. It does not discuss exclusions or alternatives, but the when-to-use context is clear enough for a zero-parameter utility.

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