list_my_skills

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. The verb 'List' clearly indicates a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose details such as output format, pagination, or the role of the agent_key parameter. It is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It earns its place, though it is arguably too terse and sacrifices valuable context for brevity.

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 simple tool with an optional parameter and an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks any explanation of the agent_key parameter and does not mention the alternative global list, leaving notable gaps for a complete understanding.

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 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention the agent_key parameter at all. The agent receives no semantic help for this parameter beyond its name, which is 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 description clearly states the action ('List') and the specific resource ('skills in your personal vault'). It effectively distinguishes itself from the sibling tool list_global_skills by emphasizing 'personal'.

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 phrase 'personal vault' implies usage for one's own skills, and the sibling list_global_skills suggests an alternative. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions.

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