Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Nanites

Nanites

by ADn-001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Discover Provider Models

nanites_discoverProviderModels

Lists models available from a cloud provider so you can choose which to use for delegated tasks.

Instructions

Auto-discover available models from a cloud provider.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "provider": "<provider>"
    },
    "name": "nanites_discoverProviderModels"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only states that models are auto-discovered. It does not disclose whether this is a read-only query, whether it mutates or registers models in storage, whether network calls occur, or whether provider credentials are required.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It earns its place by adding 'auto', 'available', and 'from a cloud provider' beyond the title, though it is perhaps too terse to carry the full explanatory load.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what a caller receives and what side effects or preconditions exist. It does neither, leaving important operational ambiguity for a tool that sits among registry-management siblings.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not compensate. The only parameter, 'provider', is backed by an enum, but the description simply says 'from a cloud provider' without explaining distinctions among cloudflare, openrouter, omniroute, and generic, leaving genuine ambiguity.

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 uses a specific verb ('Auto-discover') and resource ('available models from a cloud provider'), which goes beyond a mere restatement of the title. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like nanites_listProviderModels or seed_provider_models, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus related siblings such as nanites_listProviderModels, seed_provider_models, or list_models. The description also omits prerequisites like provider configuration or API key requirements.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools