codex_models

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It does disclose that the read is realtime and that pagination is supported, which rules out a purely static list. However, it doesn't describe the return shape, cursor source, or any error/rate-limit behavior, so transparency is only partial.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core read action in the first sentence. The pagination note is useful, though the mismatched parameter name costs it a perfect score.

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 simple list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should state that it returns a paged list, how cursor is obtained, and how limit controls page size. It covers the paged aspect loosely but omits limit and exact parameter semantics, leaving gaps for a correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description needed to document both parameters. It explains the pagination concept but refers to 'nextCursor' while the actual schema property is 'cursor', and it never mentions the 'limit' parameter or its 1–100 range. This is partial, misleading help.

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 uses a specific verb ('read') and a concrete resource ('available model list from the current Codex app-server'). It is clearly distinct from the sibling action tools (start/status/cancel/steer/review/etc.), so an agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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?

No guidance is given for when to call this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites such as 'call this before codex_start' or any exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the name and sibling context.

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