aura_install_skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It hints that the output is a file-placement plan (where to put SKILL.md per client plus upstream source), but says nothing about side effects, whether files are actually written, auth requirements, or reversibility.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally efficient. However, the awkward 'Save-and-load plan' framing trades clarity for brevity rather than genuinely earning its compactness.

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 annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is too thin to let an agent call the tool correctly. It should at minimum clarify the action performed, the meaning of 'id', and what the returned plan contains.

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 single required parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage and the description adds nothing about it. Worse, the description implies per-client variation, yet no client parameter exists, so the meaning of 'id' (skill id? client id?) is left ambiguous.

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 name says 'install_skill' but the description calls it a 'Save-and-load plan', leaving it unclear whether the tool performs the install or merely returns placement instructions. It does add resource detail (SKILL.md, per-client placement, upstream source) beyond the name, but the core action is vague and it never distinguishes itself from the sibling aura_install_component.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite, and no mention of alternatives such as aura_get_skill or aura_install_component. The agent is left to infer the entire usage context.

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