Compare AIOrouter Models

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety is covered. The description adds context about comparison dimensions (provider, pricing, etc.) but does not disclose other behavioral traits like error handling, rate limits, or reliance on external data.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and scope. Every word adds value, and it is easy to parse.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers the purpose, constraints, and expected comparison fields. No critical information is missing.

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% as the 'models' parameter has a clear description with min/max. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific action ('Compare'), the resource ('AIOrouter models'), and the exact scope (2-5 models side-by-side) along with the attributes compared. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_models or get_model_info.

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 explicitly defines when to use this tool: when comparing 2-5 models. It provides clear context without mentioning alternatives, but the context is unambiguous for a comparison task.

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