record_skill

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool writes a skill and checks for conflicts, with an option to override. This provides useful context beyond annotations, though it doesn't cover all potential 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?

Two sentences, well-structured. First sentence states purpose and format, second explains conflict check and alternatives. The version string 'v3.1.0 M3' adds minor noise but does not significantly detract.

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?

Given 7 parameters (including nested objects) and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and conflict check but lacks details on return values and the nested 'triggers' object. Slightly incomplete for a complex 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?

Schema coverage is high (86%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the 'force' parameter by explaining it overrides duplicate warnings. However, other parameters like source, summary, triggers, do_not_revert are not elaborated beyond 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Author' and resource 'new skill' with location '.codevira/skills.jsonl'. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning alternatives like supersede_skill and promote_skill_to_playbook.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool (creating new skills) and when not (use supersede_skill for versioning, promote_skill_to_playbook for promotion). Also explains conflict checking and force override.

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