查看技能参数与价格

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by stating the operation is 'Free' and returns 'exact' details, which is valuable in a market context. It does not mention error or not-found behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 front-loaded sentence that enumerates the returned details and ends with a clear cost/safety note. 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?

For a one-parameter lookup with rich annotations, the description covers what is returned and where the valid id comes from. Since there is no output schema, the explicit list of returned fields is helpful, though 'effects' is slightly vague and invalid-input behavior is not addressed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that skill_id must be 'a skill_id returned by market.search,' adding provenance and validity semantics. The schema only provides type and length, so this contextual meaning is valuable.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names the exact resource and fields returned: version, input/output schemas, examples, effects, and price for a skill_id. It also ties the input to market.search, which clearly distinguishes this lookup tool from siblings like market.invoke.

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?

It gives clear context by stating that the skill_id comes from market.search and calls the operation a 'Free read operation.' However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternatives such as market.invoke for executing a skill, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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