claude_skills_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'READ-ONLY — changes nothing,' which is a clear behavioral trait. It also mentions operating relative to cwd. However, it does not disclose other potential traits like auth requirements or return details, though for a read-only status tool, this is sufficient.

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 three sentences: first states purpose, second adds read-only nature and alternatives, third adds cwd context and CLI mirror. No fluff, front-loaded with key 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?

For a status tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, safety, and context. It could be more specific about the output content (e.g., 'returns a list of paths'), but the mention of output format parameter and CLI equivalence provides reasonable completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning about the parameters 'format' or 'worktrees' beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore, no additional value.

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 states 'report the skill symlinks under .claude/skills/ and the managed exclude-block entries left by prior claude_skills_sync runs.' It uses a specific verb ('report') and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is a preview before claude_skills_sync or claude_skills_clean.

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 says 'READ-ONLY — changes nothing, so it is the safe way to preview before calling claude_skills_sync or claude_skills_clean.' This clearly states when to use this tool (preview) and references alternative tools by name.

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