search_skills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions that results include security_grade and estimated_tokens, but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or pagination. It is read-only by implication, but more detail would be helpful.

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 two sentences with a clear focus on purpose and key features. It is concise and well-structured, though it could be slightly more compressed.

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 8 parameters, good schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately covers scope, result details, and filtering options. It mentions the catalog size and quality criteria, providing sufficient context for an agent.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema by noting the quality subset (stars>=5) and the presence of security_grade and estimated_tokens in results, which helps agents choose filters appropriately.

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 that the tool finds open-source AI agent skills & MCP servers from the AgentSkillsHub catalog using natural-language queries and filters. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (audit_skill, get_skill_install) by focusing on search and discovery.

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 indicates the tool is for searching and does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. However, the sibling tools imply different purposes (audit and install), so the usage context is reasonably clear.

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