get_skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read ("Retorna") but says nothing about what happens if the domain does not exist, whether the lookup is exact-match or case-sensitive, or any access requirements. For a tool with zero annotation coverage this is a notable gap.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and lookup key come first. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is partly a symptom of missing content rather than disciplined compression.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out here. For a simple one-parameter read tool the description is minimally sufficient, but it omits error behavior and sibling differentiation that would make selection unambiguous.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. "Pelo nome do domínio" tells the agent the lone parameter is the domain name used as the lookup key, which adds modest meaning over the bare schema, but gives no format, examples, or matching rules.

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?

States a specific verb ("Retorna") and resource ("o conteúdo de uma skill") and how the skill is identified ("pelo nome do domínio"). Clear on its own, but it does not distinguish itself from the close sibling list_skills, leaving the agent to infer the difference between fetching one skill and listing all of 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the sibling list_skills as the alternative for discovery. The agent is given no conditions under which this tool is preferred over listing skills.

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