list_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses a notable behavior: including shadowed duplicates with an explanation ('why'). This is more than a generic 'list' and gives the agent expectations about the output's richness, though it does not specify output format or side effects (which are likely none).

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 a single, concise sentence that packs essential details: the action (catalog), the target (local SKILL.md skills), the scope (configured roots), and a key feature (include shadowed duplicates with why). No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

The description conveys the tool's core functionality and scope, and the absence of parameters and output schema keeps it simple. It could be more explicit about the output format or the meaning of 'why', but for a listing operation it is largely complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters since none exist, and it does not mislead about them.

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 catalogs local SKILL.md skills from configured roots, and specifically mentions including shadowed duplicates with reasons. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like suggest_skills or bind_skills, making its 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 description gives clear context about what the tool does—listing skills from configured roots—so an agent knows when to invoke it for enumeration. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the name and action are self-explanatory enough for most use cases.

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