aura_search_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose real behavior: results are metadata-only, slim is the default, and exact_match:true bypasses a fallback/lookup widening step. That fallback hint is genuinely useful. However, nothing is said about auth requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what 'metadata' actually contains.

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 short clauses, purpose front-loaded, zero filler. The compression is slightly self-defeating in the last clause ('skips fallbacks' is cryptic without knowing what fallbacks are), which keeps it from a 5, but the overall density and ordering are strong.

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 6-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the decision-critical facts (it is metadata-only; go elsewhere for full content) but leaves paging, sort semantics, and result shape unaddressed. Adequate to invoke correctly in the common case, incomplete for the edges.

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% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It clarifies only two of them (slim's default, exact_match's fallback-skipping); query, sort, limit, and offset are left entirely to inference, including how sort interacts with query and how paging works.

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 ('Search free Aura agent skills'), quantifies the corpus (192), and constrains the return surface ('Metadata only, slim by default'). It also explicitly separates itself from the sibling that returns full content (aura_get_skill), so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

It names the alternative for the adjacent need ('use aura_get_skill for the full SKILL.md content') and states the condition that selects this tool (metadata is enough). No guidance is given for when to prefer this over other search siblings like aura_search_all or aura_search_components, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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