get_modelGet full details for a single Civitai model by id — description, type, creator, tags, download/rating stats, and every version with its base model, trigger words and downloadable files. Try id 4201 ("Realistic Vision V6.0 B1", a SFW checkpoint). Defaults Safe-For-Work; nsfw flag is surfaced. Keyless.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Civitai model id, e.g. 4201 (Realistic Vision), 133005 (Juggernaut XL). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "id": 4201
+ },
+ {
+ "id": 133005
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds value beyond annotations by noting it 'Defaults Safe-For-Work; nsfw flag is surfaced' and 'Keyless', providing important behavioral context. It also clarifies the returned data structure, which is not covered by annotations.
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 clear and front-loaded with key information. It is concise but includes useful example and notes, slightly longer than minimal but still efficient.
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 the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema) and strong annotations, the description is complete. It covers what the tool returns, safety defaults, and access requirements ('Keyless').
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% for the single parameter 'id'. The description adds an example and context but does not significantly add meaning beyond the schema's description.
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 'Get full details for a single Civitai model by id', specifying the exact resource and action. It lists the returned information (description, type, creator, tags, stats, versions) and distinguishes from sibling search_models.
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 provides context that this tool retrieves a single model by ID and gives an example ID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_models or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.