skill_search

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 implicitly indicates a read-only operation through 'search' and discloses the return format, but does not mention specifics about required parameters (team_id, agent_id) serving as scoping context or any potential rate limits/pagination behavior. This adds minimal but non-trivial behavioral info.

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?

The description is exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and a clear statement of the return value. No redundant or filler content; every word 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description plus schema cover the essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, and all parameters. It lacks usage guidance and a bit more scoping context, but for a basic search tool this is adequately complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema provides 100% coverage, with descriptions for all four parameters (query, team_id, agent_id, topK). The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already states, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Search skills by keyword' and specifies the return value ('Returns matching skills with descriptions'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like skill_get (retrieval by ID) and skill_list (listing all), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage is implied by the name and description: search for skills when you need a keyword-based lookup. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like skill_get or search, nor any exclusions or recommendations, so it stays at the implied-usage level.

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