swebsy_list_skills

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the output is a list of available skills with one-line summaries, which implies a read-only enumeration. It does not explicitly state side-effect-freeness or auth requirements, but for a simple listing tool this is adequate.

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 names the action, resource, and output format without any wasted words. Every part of the description earns its place.

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 parameterless listing tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the resource, enumerates the categories, and specifies one-line summaries as the output. A brief pointer to swebsy_get_skill for deeper guidance would improve it, but it is not essential.

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 has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies; the description's mention of specific skill categories adds useful context about what the returned list will contain.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('available deep-guidance skills') and enumerates the skill categories (animation, page-composition, copywriting, forms, nav). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling listing tools like swebsy_list_blocks and swebsy_list_pages.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'List' and by the existence of swebsy_get_skill as a sibling, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention that get_skill provides deeper detail. It is clear but not fully prescriptive.

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