recommend_skill

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the database size (~200k) and composition (scraped skills, MCP servers, plugins), and states it returns full SKILL.md content. It implies a read-only operation, though it could be more explicit about no side effects.

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 concise with two paragraphs: one explaining what the tool does and why, and one providing usage advice. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded.

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?

Despite no output schema and a single required parameter, the description covers the tool's purpose, input format, and usage context thoroughly. It includes database size and composition, making it complete for a search tool.

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 single parameter 'task' has 0% schema description coverage. The description compensates by specifying 'a short, keyword-rich description of the task,' adding meaningful guidance beyond the schema's 'Task' label.

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 the tool's purpose: it searches a database of ~200k skills and returns the full SKILL.md content. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'install_skill' by focusing on recommendation before installation.

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 advises calling the tool when the user's request might be covered by an existing skill, before building from scratch. It also recommends passing a keyword-rich description. While it doesn't list explicit when-not cases, the guidance is clear.

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