list_skills

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the environment variable fallback logic (ANSIBLE_KNOW_SKILLS_PATH vs SKILLS_DIR), duplicate-name resolution behavior, and the exact return/error format. This adds meaningful behavioral context for a read-only operation.

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 and well-structured, with a clear opening statement followed by important behavioral details and return format. It has no unnecessary filler, though slightly longer than strictly minimal.

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?

With an output schema provided and a single optional parameter, the description is fully complete: it covers the purpose, search-path behavior, duplicate resolution, and error handling. It provides all necessary context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema already fully describes the 'collection' parameter with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal extra value by clarifying the default behavior when collection is omitted, but doesn't need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 'List all available generated skills' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying 'generated' and mentioning the output fields. It's explicitly a listing tool, differentiating it from get_skill and generation tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the 'List all' phrasing and optional collection filter, but the description doesn't explicitly state when to choose this over siblings like get_skill or search_docs. It provides context for the search-path behavior but no direct alternatives or exclusions.

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