List Skill Resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not say whether this is a read-only lookup, what scope of resources is returned (all skills? installed plugins?), whether results are filtered or paginated, or if any auth/connection to the MCP server is required.

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 short sentence with no filler and the subject front-loaded. It is efficient, though not maximally informative.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should describe the returned shape or content of "resources" (skills vs. adapted Base plugins, identifiers, counts). It leaves the agent guessing what a call actually yields.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. No parameter semantics gap exists.

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 states a verb ("List") and a resource ("WalletChan MCP skill and adapted Base plugin resources"), which is more than a tautology. However, "resources" is undefined and it does not distinguish itself from sibling list tools such as list_base_plugin_runners, list_protocol_tools, or list_remote_mcp_tools, so an agent cannot confidently route between them.

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?

There is no indication of when to call this tool, what triggers it, or which alternative list tool to use instead. The many sibling "list_*" tools make this omission costly.

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