USERDATA

save_skill

Saves a new version of a skill while preserving earlier versions, enabling updates without losing prior skill history.

Instructions

Saves a new version of a skill; old versions are kept.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "skill_name": "<skill_name>",
      "skill_text": "<skill_text>",
      "skill_settings": "<skill_settings>"
    },
    "name": "save_skill"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skill_name`	Yes
`skill_text`	Yes
`skill_settings`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose one genuinely useful trait: old versions are kept, so the write is additive rather than destructive. It says nothing about whether skill_name must already exist, what happens on conflicting saves, who can invoke it, or how skill_settings affects behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single tight, front-loaded sentence with zero filler and the versioning detail placed where it matters. The brevity is efficient, though it edges toward under-specification given how much the schema leaves undocumented.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

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 explained, but three required parameters at 0% schema coverage and no annotations mean the description should do far more than one sentence. The opaque settings object and the existence/validation semantics of skill_name are the main gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across three required parameters, and the description adds almost nothing — only the implicit notion that skill_name identifies the skill being versioned. The free-form skill_settings object (additionalProperties: true) is entirely unexplained, which is a significant ambiguity for an agent that must populate it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Saves a new version of a skill" names a specific verb and resource, and the trailing clause clarifies the versioning semantics. It is clear what the tool does, though it makes no attempt to distinguish itself from siblings such as set_preference, which is the nearest conceptual neighbor.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., whether the skill must already exist), and no mention of which sibling to use for related operations like setting a preference. The agent must infer everything about selection from the tool name alone.

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