list_skills

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates the operation is a read-only list, but does not disclose potential behaviors such as network dependency, pagination, or response format. The source ('from the Loooom marketplace') adds some context, but the description is otherwise minimal.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('List all') and the object, making it immediately parseable.

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 (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description adequately states its purpose. Some might expect a note about the return format, but for a list-all tool the phrase 'available skills/plugins' sufficiently implies a list of those items.

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, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain any parameters, and the empty input schema is fully consistent. No additional parameter info is required.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'all available skills/plugins from the Loooom marketplace'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_skills (which searches) and get_skill (which retrieves a single item).

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 phrase 'all available' provides clear context that this tool is for obtaining the complete catalog, implicitly differentiating it from the more selective search_skills. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid using it or name alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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