Rea Tool Design skill

REA tool design

Use the tool-design guide for tool boundaries, contract semantics, provider ownership, and discoverability. Inspect the current contract and nearest existing tool relevant to the analyst question; source, documentation, and live catalogs may describe different versions.

For provider-backed work, exercise the analyst's task through REA and compare relevant native provider and independent artifact observations where available. Check applicable partial results, recovery and session boundaries; report what was not exercised. For failure guidance, follow design recovery around the failure. Use workflow verification to select evidence for the proposed contract instead of seeking provider API parity.

For an audit, follow audit existing tools: scope representative tasks, exercise the live workflow, and distinguish reproduced bugs, supported limitations, design opportunities and unverified claims. Check relevant rendered MCP prompts, guided workflows and packaged skill advice against the live contracts and exercise their suggested handoffs. Report working alternatives and evidence limits as well as findings.

For wording audits and agent trials, use focused tool-description trials. Start with representative workflow boundaries and repeat failures or ambiguous outcomes; keep actual arguments and supported final claims separate. Reuse the repository's evaluation tooling and report actual runtime/model versions and synthetic versus production coverage rather than copying a harness into a skill.

For a design request, return the proposed boundary, input/result shape, Evidence semantics, nearest alternative, and verification approach. Implement when requested, preserving the user's scope and existing authorization.

For implementation or verification, consult testing for the affected consumer and provider lanes, and contributing for generated-file ownership. Read provider/workflow guides only as the task requires.