List AIOrouter Models

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this as a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotation provides, such as pagination behavior or response format. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotation, so a mid-range score is appropriate.

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 two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add the filtering capability. There is no fluff or redundant elaboration. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and readable.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential functionality. It could have briefly mentioned that this returns a full catalog or suggested when to use get_model_info for specific details, but the tool is simple enough that the current description is mostly complete. A slight gap is the lack of any information about the response structure, though this is not critical for a listing tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single optional 'provider' parameter, including examples. The description merely repeats 'Filter by provider name' without adding new semantic details, so it does not surpass the schema's information. Baseline 3 applies because the schema already fully documents the parameter.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all available AI models through AIOrouter', with an optional 'filter by provider name'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_model_info (which targets a specific model) and compare_models (which compares), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for listing models, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_model_info or compare_models. There is no mention of exclusions or when not to use it, so the guidance is only implicit through the tool's name and purpose.

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