list_sn_skills

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

No annotations are supplied, but the operation is a zero-parameter list whose return shape is defined by an existing output schema. The description adds real context the schema cannot convey: what a skill is (procedural know-how, tool chains, parameter choices, sanity checks) and that skills are meant to be loaded and followed. It does not explicitly state that listing has no side effects, a minor gap.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first line, followed by a definition and then the action to take. Every sentence carries information, though the line breaks inflate the visual length slightly for the amount of content.

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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema and no annotations, this covers purpose, meaning, and follow-up action. The only gap is that the load target is called 'load-skill' rather than the actual sibling name load_sn_skill, which could cause a brief mismatch for the agent.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a no-parameter tool applies. The description correctly implies there are no filtering arguments to supply.

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 opens with a concrete verb+resource ('List this server's skills') and then defines the resource ('named multi-tool recipes') so the agent knows exactly what is returned. It also implicitly separates this tool from load_sn_skill by describing listing versus loading.

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?

It tells the agent what to do after a match ('load it with the load-skill tool and follow it'), which is the key next step and a clear pointer to the sibling tool. It does not say when listing is unnecessary or what to do if nothing matches, so it stops short of full alternatives coverage.

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