skill_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry behavioral disclosures. It only says 'Get' which implies a read operation, but does not state side effects, error handling, access requirements, or return format. This is insufficient for a tool with no other metadata.

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 brief (three words), but it is under-specified and simply restates the tool name. It lacks substantive content, making it less a model of conciseness and more a symptom of missing information.

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?

Although the tool has a simple single-parameter schema, there is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain what information is returned, how it differs from 'skill_list', or what happens if the skill name does not exist, so it is not fully complete.

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 fully documents the single 'name' parameter with a description ('Skill name'), and the tool description adds no additional meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get skill information' is a near-verbatim restatement of the tool name 'skill_get' and provides no additional specificity. It does not distinguish from sibling 'skill_list' or clarify that it retrieves a single skill by name.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'skill_list' or 'skill_stats'. It does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring a skill name, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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