skills_list

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 discloses the content domain (Core Web Vitals playbooks covering LCP, INP, CLS), which is useful, but says nothing about read-only safety, whether the list is static or versioned, or how results are ordered.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that identifies the verb, the resource, the domain, and the covered metrics with zero 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly and know what domain it returns. It could be marginally stronger by noting that skill_read is the follow-up for fetching a specific playbook.

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 tool takes zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('playbooks') scoped to Core Web Vitals diagnostics and remediation, with concrete examples (LCP, INP, CLS). The distinction from the sibling skill_read is implied by the list/read pairing but never made explicit in the text.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternative skill_read for retrieving a specific playbook. The discovery intent is only faintly implied by the verb 'List'.

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