aura_get_skill

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden, but it does disclose the return shape (SKILL.md body, source_url, page URL) and that large bodies are paginated via chunk. It omits auth/cost assumptions beyond the word 'free' and gives no rate-limit or error 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?

Front-loads the return contents, which is good, but it is written as three telegraphic fragments rather than sentences, and the dangling '(see content_info)' reference adds confusion rather than value.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is the sole source of information, and it leaves chunk semantics, expected id format, and the referenced content_info unexplained. Inadequate for an agent to invoke confidently.

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% for 2 params. The description only labels 'id' as 'Skill id' and vaguely calls chunk a paging mechanism while deferring to a 'content_info' field that is not present anywhere in the schema, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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+resource: fetching full agent-skill content (SKILL.md body) with source_url and page URL. An agent can distinguish it from aura_search_skills and aura_install_skill, though the verb 'get' is only implied by the name rather than the prose.

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 and no named alternative. It never says to call this after aura_search_skills to retrieve a full body, nor when to prefer this over installing the skill, leaving routing entirely to inference.

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