skill_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly implies a create/mutation operation but doesn't disclose side effects like whether the skill is immediately active, whether duplicate names are allowed, or what happens to draft workflows.

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 very concise with two sentences, the first directly stating the action and the second providing context on what a skill involves. No wasted content.

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 complex tool with 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It explains the concept but doesn't cover practical usage patterns, prerequisites, or return behavior. Adequate but leaves gaps for the agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema itself is well-documented for all 13 parameters.

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 'Create a new skill workflow' and defines what a skill is ('chains multiple tools together with...'), effectively differentiating it from sibling tools like skill_list, skill_execute, and skill_render.

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 when to use it (to create a skill workflow) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it versus alternatives like tool_create or the step-by-step skill_add_step mentioned in the schema.

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