Skill Path (Sadhana Path)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions deriving states from progress but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether data is modified), authorization needs, or output structure. The description is vague on computational behavior.

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 sentence that packs relevant information without redundancy. It is concise but could benefit from slight restructuring for readability.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return format (skill tree, recommendations), how parameters interact, or what the agent should expect as output.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain the purpose or usage of each parameter (section, skill_id, practicing, recommend_limit, performance_ready). It only vaguely references 'self-reported progress' without mapping to input schema properties.

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 returns the tabla Sadhana Path skill tree and derives per-skill state, recommendations, and milestone progress from self-reported progress. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from sibling tools like assessment_builder or certification_catalog.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it compares to other tools like practice_coach or daily_mission.

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