yaaif_skill_map_agents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly signals destructive behavior by saying 'Replace' and warning about 'wiping existing skills.' It does not mention authorization, reversibility, or response details, but the key destructive trait is disclosed.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the critical warning immediately after. Every word earns its place; there is no filler 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 is sufficient for a single-parameter tool with a clear schema: it states the destructive replace behavior, warns about the safer alternative, and the schema covers the input shape. It does not describe return values or failure modes, but no output schema exists and the operation is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the assignments parameter structure or the semantics of skill_ids beyond the word 'Replace.' The schema itself provides property names, but the description adds little meaning to help an agent construct valid input.

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 specific action ('Replace agent→skill mappings'), the resource (agent-skill mappings), and the bulk nature of the operation. It also names the sibling tool yaaif_skill_map_agents_merge, clearly distinguishing this tool as the replacement variant.

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 explicitly advises preferring yaaif_skill_map_agents_merge to avoid wiping existing skills, which tells the agent when not to use this tool and which alternative to choose. This is direct, actionable usage guidance.

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