Create a skill

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond that: the required markdown structure and the 409 failure mode on duplicate names, which an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, then the format requirement, then the failure mode. No filler and nothing redundant with structured fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers input format and duplicate-name behavior. The only meaningful gap is that it does not route the agent between create_skill and import_skill for the same task.

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 only 50%, and the required 'markdown' property has no schema description (just type and minLength). The description compensates by specifying the required frontmatter contents, which is real semantic value; the account-id parameter is already well documented in 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a skill') plus the source medium ('from a markdown document'), which is more informative than restating the title. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the close sibling import_skill, which also creates skills.

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 states a format prerequisite (YAML frontmatter with name/description) but gives no when-to-use guidance and never mentions the alternative import_skill or list_skills/update_skill. An agent gets no help choosing among the skill-creation siblings.

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