list_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'List' but does not state whether it returns all items, supports pagination, or any side effects. This is minimal but not misleading, so a 2 is appropriate.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It contains no fluff or redundant information, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, straightforward list operation) and an output schema exists, so detailed return value explanation is unnecessary. The phrase 'enterprise catalog' provides essential scope context relative to sibling tools, making the description complete enough for this use case.

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 schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter information to add. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies for tools with no parameters, as the description cannot add value beyond what the schema already communicates.

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 specifies the action ('List') and the resource ('enterprise catalog SDLC skills/checklists'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_project_skills by emphasizing 'enterprise catalog', indicating a global scope rather than project-specific.

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?

Usage context is implied by the phrase 'enterprise catalog' versus project-specific skills, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like list_project_skills or get_skill. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are provided.

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