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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists items, implying a read-only operation, but does not mention pagination, authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. The limit/offset parameters are not explained, so the behavior remains opaque.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It contains no wasted words and is easy to parse, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool has two parameters with no descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, leaving the description to cover all context. It does not explain pagination behavior, return format, or how this tool differs from similar list tools, so the description is incomplete for effective usage.

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 has two parameters (limit and offset) with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention these parameters at all, leaving the agent to infer their meaning from the names alone. Since the description provides no compensation, parameter semantics are severely lacking.

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 states the action ('List') and the resource ('available tools/skills in the Watson Orchestrate catalog'), giving a clear overview of the tool's function. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like list_standard_tools or list_tools_with_connections, so it misses some distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling list tools. The description only implies usage by stating it lists all available items, but it does not mention any exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites.

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