supersede_skill

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description explains that triggers inherit when omitted, old skill becomes hidden in search but retrievable via list_skills(status='superseded'), and the old is marked 'superseded' with a backref. This provides comprehensive behavioral context.

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 sentences with clear purpose front-loaded. Minor version prefix ('v3.1.0 M3') adds noise but does not significantly impact clarity. No wasted words.

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?

Missing output schema description, no error conditions or prerequisites. Parameter semantics incomplete. Does not place tool in broader workflow among many siblings.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains old_id, name, procedure (implied), and triggers inheritance, but does not cover reason, summary, or do_not_revert. Partial value added.

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 tool creates a new skill version that supersedes an old one, using the verb 'writes' and specifying the resource 'skill'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'record_skill' (new without superseding) and 'list_skills' (listing).

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 implies when to use (when versioning and deprecating a skill) and mentions inheritance and search behavior. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons with alternatives like 'supersede_decision'.

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