yaaif_skill_refresh

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 disclosing behavior. It only says 're-discover skill files into the catalog'; it does not state whether the operation is idempotent, whether missing skills are removed, whether it affects the running runtime, or what side effects occur.

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 sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. It earns the 4 rather than 5 because 'Re-discover' is slightly jargon-like and the sentence carries no extra structural support for an agent.

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 annotations, no output schema, and no usage context, the description is too thin to make a confident call relative to skill_runtime_reload or skill_validate. An agent knows the intended action roughly, but not why, when, or what happens after calling it.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter information that the description needs to add. The baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameter semantics to clarify.

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 names a distinct operation ('re-discover') and a resource ('skill files into the catalog'), so an agent can tell it is a catalog-rescanning action rather than a tautology. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from nearby siblings like yaaif_skill_runtime_reload or yaaif_skill_validate, so it stops short of a 5.

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 statement about when to call this tool, when not to call it, or which sibling to choose instead. An agent must infer that it is for refreshing the skill catalog after files changed, with no guidance against alternatives such as runtime_reload.

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