List AI models

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's [READ] marker merely repeats structured data. It adds the endpoint path but does not disclose pagination behavior, response shape, authentication requirements, or any other operational context beyond what annotations already state.

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 one compact line with the read-only marker front-loaded and no wasted prose. It is appropriately short for a zero-parameter tool, though it is arguably too minimal to be fully informative.

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 zero-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient: it names the endpoint and indicates read-only access. It still omits expected return shape, pagination, and how the results relate to sibling AI resource listings.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already shows.

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 identifies the operation as a read-only OpenAPI GET /models call, and the title 'List AI models' makes the resource clear. However, it does not distinguish this collection-listing tool from the sibling get_ai_model tool beyond the plural endpoint path, relying largely on the name and title to convey purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use list_ai_models versus alternatives such as get_ai_model or list_ai_endpoints. The [READ] marker implies a safe listing operation, but no usage context or routing guidance is provided.

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