Load an installed development skill

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms it's a load operation. The description adds no extra behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, such as caching or permission details. It is consistent with annotations, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 consists of two clear, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence defines the core action, and the second provides a concrete use case. No extraneous information, every sentence serves a purpose.

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 is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description explains what the tool does and provides a usage example. However, it does not describe the return format or structure of the 'complete governing instructions', which would enhance completeness. Still, it is mostly adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'name' parameter. The description only adds an example value ('frontend-craft-director') but does not explain the pattern, constraints, or other valid values. Thus, it adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 it loads 'complete governing instructions' for a centrally installed skill. It uses a specific verb ('Loads') and resource ('skill'), and differentiates from siblings like list_skills by focusing on loading instructions rather than listing. The concrete example of using 'frontend-craft-director' further clarifies its purpose.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'For frontend design, redesign, ... call get_skill with 'frontend-craft-director' before inspecting or editing.' This provides clear context and usage ordering. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is strong.

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