enhance_skill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions AI usage, modes, and dependencies (API key), but does not clarify if the tool is destructive, modifies files in place, or requires specific permissions. The outcome is described, but side effects are omitted.

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 three sentences, front-loading the main action, then detailing modes and outcome. No redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the 4 parameters with 0% schema description and no annotations, the description provides an overview of functionality but misses key details like the required 'skill_dir' parameter and the return structure. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It covers 'mode' (local vs API) and 'api_key' (required for API mode) well, but does not explain 'skill_dir' (the only required parameter) or 'target' (default 'auto'). This leaves a critical gap for the agent.

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 enhances SKILL.md using AI, specifying two modes (local and API) and the outcome (500+ line guides). This is a specific verb+resource combination. Among siblings, none duplicate this purpose, so differentiation is implicit but effective.

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 explains when to use local vs API mode based on API key availability, but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare to alternatives. Usage context is implied but lacks exclusions or explicit guidance for selection from siblings.

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