Agent skill

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping

by agentsope in agentsope/SkillAlchemy

Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call.

MITAuto-check passedAI & LLM Engineering

Install Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping

skills CLI
$ npx skills add agentsope/SkillAlchemy --skill agentsop-http-tool-wrapping -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install agentsope/SkillAlchemy agentsop-http-tool-wrapping --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agentsope/SkillAlchemy.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping .claude/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
agentsop-http-tool-wrapping
GitHub stars
459
Token cost
~5.9k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,761 words
Files
5 (incl. references)
Skills in repo
45
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call.

  • Works in 7 steps: 何时激活 (When to Activate) → 核心心智模型 (Core Mental Model) → SOP 工作流 (Standard Operating Procedure) → …
  • Tasks that involve Building AI agents
  • SKILL.md covers 1. 何时激活 (When to Activate), 2. 核心心智模型 (Core Mental Model), 3. SOP 工作流 (Standard Operating… and 4. 操作模型 (Operation Models), plus 4 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping is an agent skill from agentsope/SkillAlchemy. Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call. The load-bearing premise: the tool surface is an LM-friendly subset of the API surface — one tool per user intent, not one per endpoint. Activates when a coder agent must expose an external HTTP API to a model (function calling, tooluse, MCP, LangChain @tool, CrewAI BaseTool). Encodes the what to surface, how to name, how to shape, how to fail — not any single framework's API. ~80% of agent tools in production are HTTP…

Its SKILL.md is about 5.9k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 6 other files, including reference files (for example `README.md`, `intermediate/operation_candidates.json` and `references/R1-source-evidence.md`).

It sits in AI & LLM Engineering, covering Building AI agents, Operations and SOPs and Structured output and tool calling. It works with Model Context Protocol, CrewAI, LangChain and GraphQL. The repository describes itself as: From thought to skill. From signal to structure. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Tasks that involve Building AI agents
  • Tasks that involve Operations and SOPs
  • Tasks that involve Structured output and tool calling

Example prompts

  • “/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping”

Workflow steps

7 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. 何时激活 (When to Activate)
  2. 核心心智模型 (Core Mental Model)
  3. SOP 工作流 (Standard Operating Procedure)
  4. 操作模型 (Operation Models)
  5. 困境决策案例 (Dilemma Cases)
  6. 反模式与边界 (Anti-Patterns & Boundaries)
  7. 跨框架对照 (Cross-Framework Mapping)

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 6ea799f. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are json).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping loads about 5.9k tokens when it runs, and up to ~10k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 151 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,761 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~151
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.9k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~10k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from agentsope/SkillAlchemy at commit 6ea799f, republished under its MIT licence (© agentsope). 2,761 words, ~5,892 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 4 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
agentsop-http-tool-wrapping
description
Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call. The load-bearing premise: the *tool surface* is an LM-friendly subset of the *API surface* — one tool per user intent, not one per endpoint. Activates when a coder agent must expose an external HTTP API to a model (function calling, tool_use, MCP, LangChain `@tool`, CrewAI `BaseTool`). Encodes the *what to surface, how to name, how to shape, how to fail* — not any single framework's API. ~80% of agent tools in production are HTTP wrappers; this is the SOP for getting them right.
version
0.1.0
domain
coder-agent / tool-construction
audience
engineers wiring external APIs into LLM agents
trigger_keywords
wrap an API as a tool, expose REST endpoint to agent, function calling for my API, MCP server for existing API, tool returns too much JSON, agent rate limited…
when_to_use
exposing a third-party or internal HTTP API to an LLM agent, deciding which of N endpoints deserve to become tools, an existing tool dumps raw JSON and the…
when_not_to_use
the API is already an MCP server you only consume (just connect), no external I/O — pure local computation (write a plain function tool), designing the…

HTTP / External API → Agent Tool · SOP

Source posture: every non-trivial claim is cited inline with short tags like [oai/fc], [anthropic/tooluse], [lc/tools], [mcp/spec], [apxml/schema]. Resolve them against references/R1-source-evidence.md for full URLs. Reusable code shapes live in references/R2-pattern-library.md.


1. 何时激活 (When to Activate)

Activate when a coder agent must make an external HTTP API callable by an LLM. Concrete triggers:

  • The task says "give the agent access to <some API>", "add a tool that calls <service>", "wrap our REST/GraphQL/RPC endpoint as a function the model can use".
  • You are choosing which of N endpoints become tools, or how to name them.
  • An existing tool returns a huge JSON blob and the model hallucinates field names, or burns context re-reading it.
  • Tool calls die on 429, timeouts, or unpaginated list endpoints.
  • You need the same tool to run under OpenAI function calling, Anthropic tool_use, an MCP server, LangChain @tool, and CrewAI BaseTool.

Do not activate when: the API is already exposed as an MCP server you merely consume (just connect it); the "tool" is pure local computation with no network I/O (write a plain typed function); or you are designing the upstream API itself.

This is a tool-construction skill — sibling to the framework SOPs (langgraph-sop, crewai-sop) which decide whether/where tools run. Once you know you need a tool, this skill decides what shape it takes.


2. 核心心智模型 (Core Mental Model)

The tool surface is an LM-friendly subset of the API surface. One tool per intent, not one per endpoint.

A REST API is designed for programmers who read docs, hold a mental model of resources, and compose calls. An agent tool is designed for a language model that sees only a name, a description, and a JSON schema — and must decide, mid-reasoning, whether this is the thing to call. These are different audiences, so the surface must be re-cut, not mirrored.

"Tool descriptions are often more important than code comments because the LLM directly uses them for reasoning." [apxml/schema]

Four load-bearing consequences:

  1. Intent, not CRUD. The unit of a tool is a thing the agent wants to accomplish (cancel_order, find_customer_by_email), not an HTTP verb on a resource (DELETE /orders/{id}). One intent may compose several endpoints; one endpoint may serve zero intents (admin/batch/webhook-out endpoints get dropped). Surface intent, not the verb table [zuplo/agent-ready].

  2. The schema is the prompt. The model never sees your code. It sees the tool name, the description, and each field's description=. Every field needs units, format, enum values, and an example aimed at the model — "if a field is a date, specify ISO 8601 vs Unix timestamp" [apxml/schema]. A typed schema (Pydantic / JSON Schema) is non-negotiable because it is both the validation layer and the documentation the model reads [lc/tools].

  3. The response is context, and context is scarce. A 10 MB JSON payload is not "data the agent has" — it is tokens the agent must pay for, re-read, and can misquote. Shape the response down to the fields the agent needs to reason or act on. Returning raw upstream JSON is the second most common anti-pattern after 1:1 mapping.

  4. The model cannot promise call discipline. It may emit zero, one, or several calls — "best practice [is] to assume there are several" [oai/fc] — retry on its own, or be resumed by the framework. So the wrapper owns reliability (timeout, retry, rate-limit) and safety (idempotency on mutations). You cannot prompt these guarantees into existence; you build them into the tool. (Side-effect safety is deep enough to be its own skill — cross-link llm-tool-idempotency for any mutating tool.)

The pre-LLM analog: you are writing an SDK for a non-deterministic, amnesiac junior dev who reads only the function signature — generous docstrings, narrow typed inputs, small clean returns, and total robustness to being called wrong.


3. SOP 工作流 (Standard Operating Procedure)

Walk top-down. Each step has a gate — if it fails, fix it before adding surface.

Step 1 · Triage: which endpoints deserve to be tools?

List every endpoint × verb. For each, ask: "what user/agent intent does this serve?" Drop endpoints with no agent-facing intent (internal admin, batch jobs, outbound webhooks). The MCP guidance is a useful first cut: GET-style data reads often map to resources; create/update/delete map to tools [gun/mcp]. Target ≤10 surfaced operations for a first pass.

Gate: if you are about to create one tool per endpoint, stop — that is AP-1. Auto-generated 1:1 servers from an OpenAPI spec "routinely under-perform hand-curated tools" [stainless/mcp].

Step 2 · Name from intent

Tool name = verb_object describing intent: search_orders, cancel_order, get_order_status. Not post_orders_v2, delete_orders_id. Test: a model that has never seen your API, reading only the name, should guess when to call it. The name should be a verb; the description should explain when to call, not how [oai/prompting].

Step 3 · Flatten params into a typed schema

Define a Pydantic model (or JSON Schema). Rules:

  • Type-annotated fields, each with a model-facing description= (units, format, enum, example) [lc/tools] [apxml/schema].
  • Flatten the API's wire format: filter[status]=open → status: Literal["open","closed"]. The model should never construct a query-string fragment.
  • Explicit required vs optional. Defaults where the API has sensible ones.
  • Hide pagination/auth/internal knobs from the schema (Steps 5–6).

Gate: every field the model can set has a description=. Untyped **kwargs or a free-form body: str is a smell — the model will fill it wrong.

Step 4 · Error handling: translate, never leak

Catch HTTPStatusError / ValidationError / network errors. Return a structured, LM-readable error, never a raw stack trace:

json
{"error": "rate_limited", "message": "...", "retryable": true, "hint": "wait and retry"}

Use a small closed set of error codes (not_found, invalid_input, auth_failed, rate_limited, server_error). LangChain's ToolException converts a raised error into an LM-visible string for the same reason [lc/structured]. The model reasons over the error like any other tool output — give it something it can act on.

Step 5 · Shape the output

Define an output model with only the fields the agent needs. Drop audit timestamps, internal mirrors, deprecated fields, ETags. Summarize blobs into strings. Aim for a compact payload per call (rule of thumb: keep it small enough that re-reading it 5 times in a loop is cheap). For lists, return items + a next_cursor, not the whole dataset (Step 5b).

Step 5b · Pagination. Default: fetch one page, return items + next_cursor, let the agent decide to continue. Prefer cursor over offset — "cursor-based pagination is more reliable than offset/limit for agentic scrolling" [techops/rest]. Auto-loop only when total is small and bounded (≤200); never loop unbounded — a single agent can "burst 20 sequential API calls to complete one task" [zuplo/agent-ready] (cross-link bounded-loop skill).

Step 6 · Auth & secrets at the wrapper boundary

Read the key/token from env or a secret store inside the wrapper. Never expose api_key as a tool parameter and never put a secret in the description — the model doesn't need it and traces would leak it. Per-tenant tokens flow via a closure or context object, not via tool args [northflank/mcp].

Gate: grep your tool schema and description for key, token, secret, password. Zero hits.

Step 7 · Idempotency on mutations

If the tool does POST/PUT/DELETE, it will be retried by the model or the framework. Generate an idempotency key per logical operation and pass it (Idempotency-Key header) when the API supports it — the canonical Stripe pattern [stripe/idem]. Tag the tool metadata mutating=True. For the full decision tree (key derivation, dedup store, at-least-once vs exactly-once), defer to the llm-tool-idempotency skill — that is its entire domain.


4. 操作模型 (Operation Models)

Format: Trigger → Action → Output → Evidence. (Full JSON in intermediate/operation_candidates.json.)

OP-1 · Endpoint triage
  • Trigger: New API, >3 endpoints.
  • Action: Enumerate endpoint × verb; label each with the agent intent it serves; drop the intent-less ones. Cap at ~10.
  • Output: Triaged candidate list with intent labels.
  • Evidence: [zuplo/agent-ready] [stainless/mcp].
OP-2 · Name by intent
  • Trigger: Naming a surfaced operation.
  • Action: verb_object; name-only readability test.
  • Output: Intent-named tool.
  • Evidence: [oai/prompting].
OP-3 · Typed input schema
  • Trigger: Each surfaced tool.
  • Action: Pydantic model; per-field model-facing description=; flatten wire params; explicit required/optional.
  • Output: args_schema on the tool.
  • Evidence: [lc/tools] [oai/fc] [anthropic/tooluse] [apxml/schema].
OP-4 · Inject auth at boundary
  • Trigger: Tool needs a key/token.
  • Action: Read secret inside the wrapper from env/secret store; never a tool param; per-tenant via closure/context.
  • Output: Tool that authenticates with no secret in schema.
  • Evidence: [northflank/mcp].
OP-5 · Timeout + retry + jittered backoff
  • Trigger: Any outbound HTTP from a tool.
  • Action: Explicit per-attempt timeout=. Retry only on 429/5xx/network, max 3–5, exponential backoff with jitter, honor Retry-After. Never retry other 4xx.
  • Output: Resilient client inside the tool.
  • Evidence: [apxml/rate] [boldsign/retry] [getknit/rate].
OP-6 · Pagination — cursor first
  • Trigger: List endpoint with next/cursor/Link.
  • Action: Return one page + next_cursor; agent decides to continue; bounded auto-loop only for small totals.
  • Output: Paginated tool with explicit cursor surface.
  • Evidence: [techops/rest] [zuplo/agent-ready].
OP-7 · Response shaping
  • Trigger: API returns large/deep JSON.
  • Action: Output Pydantic model with only reason/act-relevant fields; drop audit/internal/deprecated; summarize blobs.
  • Output: Trimmed structured output.
  • Evidence: [apxml/schema] [gun/mcp].
OP-8 · Error → readable feedback
  • Trigger: Non-2xx or local exception.
  • Action: Catch; return {error, message, retryable, hint} from a closed code set; never raw traces.
  • Output: LM-readable error contract.
  • Evidence: [lc/structured] [mighty/fault].
OP-9 · Idempotency key on mutations
  • Trigger: POST/PUT/DELETE side effect.
  • Action: Per-operation idempotency key via header; tag mutating=True. Defer full protocol to llm-tool-idempotency.
  • Output: Mutation-safe tool with idempotency contract.
  • Evidence: [stripe/idem] [techops/rest] [mighty/fault].
OP-10 · Framework binding
  • Trigger: Implementation done; deploy into an agent.
  • Action: One Pydantic schema → all targets. LangChain/LangGraph: @tool with args_schema. CrewAI: subclass BaseTool._run. OpenAI: tools=[{type: "function", function:{...}}]. Anthropic: {name, description, input_schema}. MCP: @mcp.tool(). Derive each via Model.model_json_schema().
  • Output: Framework-bound tool.
  • Evidence: [lc/tools] [crewai/tools] [mcp/spec] [oai/fc] [anthropic/tooluse].

5. 困境决策案例 (Dilemma Cases)

Show full SKILL.md (1,202 more words)Show less
DC-1 · Wide API (50+ endpoints): one mega-tool or many?

Scenario: A CRM API has 60 endpoints. Do you ship 60 tools, or one crm_operation(operation: str, params: dict) mega-tool?

Trap (mega-tool): A single tool with a free-form operation string and a dict of params pushes all routing into the model with no schema help. "A mega-tool with a single instructions string invites hallucinations" [medium/velorum] — the model invents operation names and param shapes, and the wrapper can't validate them.

Trap (1:1, 60 tools): Flat catalogs degrade selection accuracy at scale — beyond ~50 tools, "flat tool-list catalogs degrade selection accuracy; hierarchical / graph organization helps" [arxiv/toolnet]. The model spends reasoning budget scanning a wall of near-identical names.

Decision rule:

  1. Triage to the ~10 endpoints with real agent intent (OP-1). Most wide APIs collapse hard — 60 endpoints, ~8 intents.
  2. If still >~15 after triage, group by sub-domain into a few medium tools, each with a typed action: Literal[...] enum (not a free string) plus a discriminated-union params model. The enum keeps schema validation; the grouping keeps the catalog short. This is the middle path between 1:1 and one mega-blob.
  3. Only consider a true mega-tool if the API is genuinely uniform (e.g. a GraphQL endpoint where the single tool is graphql_query(query, variables) with a documented schema) — and even then, constrain it.

Verdict: Neither extreme. Triage first, then typed grouping. The win is a short catalog of validated tools, not raw endpoint count in either direction.

DC-2 · API returns 10 MB JSON: what to expose?

Scenario: get_customer_360 returns a 10 MB document — full order history, event logs, nested addresses, internal flags.

Trap: Return it whole. The model pays ~2–3M tokens, can't fit it, and will quote fields that aren't there. Truncating blindly loses the field the agent needed.

Decision rule:

  1. Ask what the agent will do with this. Usually it needs 5–15 fields, not 2,000. Define a thin output model of exactly those (OP-7).
  2. For the long tails (order history, logs), don't inline them — return a count + a summary + a follow-up tool: recent_orders_count: int, last_order_summary: str, and a separate list_customer_orders(cursor) the agent calls only if it needs more (OP-6 pagination).
  3. For genuinely large text blobs the agent must read, store them and return a reference/handle the agent can fetch on demand, rather than inlining.
  4. Set a hard per-call byte budget in the wrapper; if the shaped output still exceeds it, that's a signal the tool is doing too much — split it.

Verdict: Expose a thin reason/act slice; demote bulk to follow-up paginated tools or references. The tool's job is to give the model enough to decide the next step, not the whole record.

DC-3 · Async / long-running API (submit job → poll): one tool or two?

Scenario: A report API: POST /reports returns a job_id; you poll GET /reports/{job_id} until status=done (can take minutes).

Options:

  • A. One tool that blocks — generate_report() submits then polls internally until done. Simple mental model for the model, but holds the agent (and its timeout) hostage for minutes, and a single per-attempt HTTP timeout can't cover it.
  • B. Two tools — submit_report() -> job_id and check_report(job_id) -> status|result. The agent submits, does other work, polls. Robust to long waits; matches the agent loop; but the model must remember to poll.

Decision rule:

  1. If the job reliably finishes in seconds and well under one HTTP timeout → one blocking tool (A) with internal bounded poll + jittered backoff (OP-5).
  2. If it can run minutes+, or you need the agent to stay responsive → two tools (B). Make check_report return a clear status enum so the model knows whether to wait, and bound the agent's poll count (bounded-loop skill).
  3. Either way, the submit call is a mutation — give it an idempotency key (OP-9) so a retried submit doesn't queue two jobs.

Verdict: Match the tool shape to the latency. Sub-second → hide the poll inside one tool; minutes → split, and make the agent's polling explicit and bounded.


6. 反模式与边界 (Anti-Patterns & Boundaries)

#Anti-patternSymptomFix
AP-11:1 endpoint→tool mapping40+ near-identical tools; model picks wrong oneTriage to intents (OP-1); auto-gen 1:1 "under-performs hand-curated" [stainless/mcp]
AP-2Raw JSON dump to the LMContext bloat, hallucinated field namesOutput model with only reason/act fields (OP-7)
AP-3Secrets in description or argsAPI key leaks into traces/logsAuth inside wrapper from env/secret store (OP-4)
AP-4No rate-limit / retry handlingOne 429 or blip kills the whole runTimeout + jittered retry, honor Retry-After (OP-5)
AP-5Unbounded pagination auto-loopToken blowout / OOM on big listsReturn page + cursor; bounded loop only (OP-6)
AP-6Procedural description ("first call X, then Y")Model treats the tool as a script, mis-sequencesDescribe when to call, not how; one intent per tool [oai/prompting]
AP-7Free-form body: str / params: dictModel fills the wire format wrongTyped flattened schema (OP-3)
AP-8Raising stack traces to the modelModel parrots Python tracebacks at the userStructured {error, retryable, hint} (OP-8)

Hard boundaries — this skill is the wrong frame when:

  • The API is already an MCP server / first-class SDK with model-friendly surface — just connect it; don't re-wrap.
  • The "tool" has no network I/O — write a plain typed function tool.
  • You own and can change the upstream API — fix the API to be agent-ready (intent endpoints, machine-readable errors [serghei/agent-ready]) rather than papering over it in a wrapper.
  • Side-effect safety is the core problem (exactly-once, dedup store) — that's the llm-tool-idempotency skill; this skill only flags the hook (OP-9).

7. 跨框架对照 (Cross-Framework Mapping)

The wrapper logic — triage, naming, typed schema, auth, retry, pagination, shaping, errors — is framework-independent. The only framework-specific layer is the registration call. One Pydantic v2 model feeds all five targets via model_json_schema() and model_validate().

FrameworkDefinition shapeSchema sourceError surfaceNotes
OpenAI function callingtools=[{type:"function", function:{name, description, parameters}}]parameters = JSON SchemaReturn error JSON as the tool result"Assume there are several [calls]" — wrappers must be parallel-safe [oai/fc]
Anthropic tool_usetools=[{name, description, input_schema}]input_schema = JSON Schematool_result with is_error:true keyed by tool_use_idCorrelate response to request via tool_use_id [anthropic/tooluse]
MCP HTTP server@mcp.tool() (FastMCP)Inferred from type hints / PydanticReturn structured error contentGET→resource, mutate→tool split [gun/mcp]; don't auto-gen 1:1 [stainless/mcp]
LangChain / LangGraph@tool or StructuredTool with args_schemaPydantic args_schemaToolException → LM-visible string [lc/structured]Type hints required; docstring is the description [lc/tools]
CrewAIsubclass BaseTool, implement _run, set args_schemaPydantic args_schemaReturn string; weak built-in error capturePer-agent scoping: shared definition, per-agent binding [crewai/tools]

Two cross-framework heuristics carried in from the sibling SOPs:

  • Per-step / per-agent tool scoping (from CrewAI + OpenAI allowed_tools): give each agent/step only the tools its role needs. Fewer tools = better selection and less context [oai/tools] [crewai/tools]. A wide wrapped API should still be scoped per agent, not bound wholesale.
  • Tools are functions, not chains (from LangGraph): the wrapper does one thing and returns; orchestration (retries across tools, branching, HITL) lives in the graph/crew, not inside the tool. Keep the wrapper pure and bounded.

附录: 引用速查 (Citation Index)

Short tags → full sources in references/R1-source-evidence.md:

  • [oai/fc] = developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/function-calling
  • [oai/tools] = developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/tools (allowed_tools)
  • [oai/prompting] = community.openai.com/t/prompting-best-practices-for-tool-use-function-calling/1123036
  • [anthropic/tooluse] = docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/build-with-claude/tool-use
  • [lc/tools] = docs.langchain.com/oss/python/langchain/tools
  • [lc/structured] = blog.langchain.com/structured-tools/
  • [crewai/tools] = docs.crewai.com/en/concepts/tools
  • [mcp/spec] = modelcontextprotocol.io/specification
  • [gun/mcp] = gun.io/ai/2025/05/wrap-existing-api-with-mcp/
  • [stainless/mcp] = stainless.com/mcp/from-rest-api-to-mcp-server/
  • [northflank/mcp] = northflank.com/blog/how-to-build-and-deploy-a-model-context-protocol-mcp-server
  • [apxml/schema] = apxml.com/.../tool-input-output-schemas
  • [apxml/rate] = apxml.com/.../api-rate-limits-retries-tools
  • [boldsign/retry] = boldsign.com/blogs/api-retry-mechanism-how-it-works-best-practices/
  • [getknit/rate] = getknit.dev/blog/10-best-practices-for-api-rate-limiting-and-throttling
  • [techops/rest] = techopsasia.com/blog/rest-api-design-idempotency-pagination-security
  • [stripe/idem] = stripe.com/docs/api/idempotent_requests
  • [mighty/fault] = mightybot.ai/blog/fault-tolerant-ai-agent-pipelines/
  • [zuplo/agent-ready] = zuplo.com/learning-center/api-readiness-gap-agent-callable-apis
  • [serghei/agent-ready] = sergheipogor.medium.com/how-to-make-your-api-agent-ready-...
  • [medium/velorum] = medium.com/@1nick1patel1/tool-schemas-the-quiet-superpower-of-agents
  • [arxiv/toolnet] = arxiv.org/pdf/2403.00839 (ToolNet, Liu et al. 2024)

© agentsope, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 4 other files (references) in skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping of agentsope/SkillAlchemy.

  • SKILL.md
  • README.md
  • intermediate/operation_candidates.json
  • references/R1-source-evidence.md
  • references/R2-pattern-library.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 6ea799f

Compare with similar skills

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping this skillagentsope/SkillAlchemy459—~5.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Tool Designagentailor/fullstack-langgraph-nextjs-agent132—~3.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
AI Agents Architectomer-metin/skills-for-antigravity162—~558Automated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Agent Harness DesignAnastasiyaW/codex-claude-code-config154—~764Automated safety check: PassMIT
Neo4j Agent Memory Skillneo4j-contrib/neo4j-skills114—~5.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Mem0 Platform SDKmem0ai/mem067k2 repos~2.2kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0

Similar skills

  • Tool Design

    agentailor/fullstack-langgraph-nextjs-agent

    Design and verify tools that AI agents can actually use — for any framework or language (MCP servers, LangChain/LangGraph, function-calling, raw JSON schema; TypeScript, Python, or otherwise).

    132 GitHub stars~3.2k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • AI Agents Architect

    omer-metin/skills-for-antigravity

    Expert in designing and building autonomous AI agents. An agent skill from omer-metin/skills-for-antigravity.

    162 GitHub stars~558 tokensUpdated 8 mo ago
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Agent Harness Design

    AnastasiyaW/codex-claude-code-config

    Designing agent harnesses and tool systems — risk taxonomy for tools, permission decisions, draft/commit pattern, structured tool results, agent budgets (10 types), context trust labels against…

    154 GitHub stars~764 tokensUpdated today
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Neo4j Agent Memory Skill

    neo4j-contrib/neo4j-skills

    Authoritative reference for the neo4j-agent-memory Python package — a graph-native memory system for AI agents built on Neo4j — and for the hosted service (NAMS) at memory.neo4jlabs.com.

    114 GitHub stars~5.8k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Adds persistent memory to AI apps with the Mem0 Python and TypeScript SDKs: store, search, update and delete user memories, with framework integrations.

    67k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~2.2k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Edgeone Makers Migration

    TencentEdgeOne/edgeone-makers-tools

    Migrate existing AI agent projects (LangChain, LangGraph, OpenAI Agents SDK, Claude Agent SDK, CrewAI) to EdgeOne Makers platform conventions.

    1.9k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~4.1k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed

More from agentsope/SkillAlchemy

All 45 skills in this repo
  • Agentsop Aider

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    SOP for terminal-based, git-native AI pair programming with Aider (git work-tree + tree-sitter repo-map + edit-format + human-in-loop REPL).

    459 GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Agentsop Context Scope Discipline

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    Coder-agent working-file budget discipline: keep the editable working set (files you /add into writable context) under ~25k tokens, separate "read" from "edit", delegate breadth to a read-only…

    459 GitHub stars~3k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Agentsop Cost Tiered Models

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    Split a multi-call LM workflow by cognitive load, not by accuracy: let one strong model make the few reasoning decisions and a cheap model do the many mechanical executions (Aider architect+editor…

    459 GitHub stars~3k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Agentsop Crewai

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    SOP for building multi-agent systems with CrewAI — role-based collaboration, sequential/hierarchical processes, Flows, memory, delegation.

    459 GitHub stars~4.8k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Agentsop Dify

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    SOP for building LLM applications on Dify — visual workflow + chatflow + agent + RAG knowledge base + plugin marketplace + observability, self-hostable.

    459 GitHub stars~5.4k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check: notes
  • Agentsop Multiscale Chunking

    agentsope/SkillAlchemy

    Designs multiscale chunking for RAG by embedding small units for retrieval precision and returning larger context for synthesis.

    459 GitHub stars~4.9k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping

What does Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping do?

Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call. Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping is an agent skill from agentsope/SkillAlchemy. Decision protocol for wrapping a REST / GraphQL / RPC API as a tool an LLM agent can call.

When should I use Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping?

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping fits situations like: tasks that involve Building AI agents; tasks that involve Operations and SOPs; tasks that involve Structured output and tool calling.

How do I install Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add agentsope/SkillAlchemy --skill agentsop-http-tool-wrapping -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping in agentsope/SkillAlchemy) into .claude/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping in Codex?

Run `npx skills add agentsope/SkillAlchemy --skill agentsop-http-tool-wrapping -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping in agentsope/SkillAlchemy) into .agents/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add agentsope/SkillAlchemy --skill agentsop-http-tool-wrapping -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping, .gemini/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping, .github/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping and .opencode/skills/agentsop-http-tool-wrapping in your project.

What does Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping is instructions for the agent only.

Does Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping use?

Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping use?

About 5.9k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 24k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 4.3k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping: Tool Design (agentailor/fullstack-langgraph-nextjs-agent, 132 stars), AI Agents Architect (omer-metin/skills-for-antigravity, 162 stars), Agent Harness Design (AnastasiyaW/codex-claude-code-config, 154 stars) and Neo4j Agent Memory Skill (neo4j-contrib/neo4j-skills, 114 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Agentsop HTTP Tool Wrapping?

agentsope (a GitHub user) maintains it in agentsope/SkillAlchemy, which has 459 GitHub stars. The repository holds 45 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 2, 2026.

Source: agentsope/SkillAlchemy on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.