Skip to main content
Glama

ai-netcafe

by com.ainetcafe

List available models and capacity

list_models
Read-onlyIdempotent

List every model currently available in the free beta with reference input/output rates and health metadata. Those rates are platform cost metadata only; every user charge is $0.00 during the beta. Example — GET https://ainetcafe.com/t/list_models

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tierNoOptional reference tier filter. All currently healthy tiers are available without a user key during the beta.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelsYes

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the beta status, the $0 pricing, and that rates are reference metadata rather than actual charges.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences plus an example endpoint. The core purpose and pricing caveat are front-loaded with no filler, and the example is a useful concrete reference.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a single well-documented optional parameter, rich safety annotations, and an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs to correctly invoke the tool. The beta/pricing context and example further round out the picture.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single optional 'tier' parameter, which is fully described with enum values and notes about availability during beta. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the schema carries the burden and the baseline applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and resource: 'List every model currently available in the free beta' with rates and health metadata. It is clear and scoped, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like compare_models or model_costs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: it lists all available models during the free beta and clarifies that rates are cost metadata while charges are $0. It does not explicitly state when to prefer alternatives, but the context is sufficient for typical selection.

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

All ai-netcafe toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct, but there are several overlapping groups: PDF extraction (extract_invoices, extract_statement, extract_tables, pdf_to_markdown), table comparison (diff_tables vs reconcile_ledger), and model pricing (list_models vs model_costs). Descriptions help clarify boundaries, but an agent could misselect without careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use lowercase snake_case, but the verb-noun pattern is inconsistent. Most tools are verb-first (build_app, clean_table, fetch_page), but several are noun-first (jwt_decode, regex_test, web_search), noun-only (ai_visibility, model_costs), bare verbs (recall, remember), or a full phrase (what_can_you_do). This mixed convention is still readable but not predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, this server exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. While the breadth covers many utility domains, the count is heavy and some tools could be consolidated or removed. A more focused set would reduce cognitive load and misselection risk.

Completeness3/5

The utility set covers web, PDF, CSV, model, task, and dev tooling well, but there are notable gaps in resource lifecycles. Apps have build/list/get but no update/delete, and memories support remember/recall but no forget. These missing operations could create dead ends for agents.

Resources