model_info

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds the "[READ]" marker and the useful caveat that the permission field is best-effort (i.e., may be incomplete), which the annotations do not convey. It says nothing about error behavior for an unknown model_id.

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?

Two short lines: a front-loaded one-sentence summary of what is returned, then a tight per-argument list. No filler or repetition.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, naming the returned config fields and the best-effort caveat gives the agent enough to call it and interpret the result. The absence of any note on missing/unknown model_id handling is the only real gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the full load — and it does document both parameters: model_id's provenance (model_list) and target's meaning plus its omission default. Only the string format of target is left unspecified.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — read one model's config — and enumerates the fields returned (max length, root/parent, permission). The word "One" implies the counterpart to the sibling list tool, but it never names model_list as the plural alternative, so it stops short of explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

Usage is only implied: it tells the agent where model_id comes from (model_list) and that target may be omitted for the default. There is no statement of when to prefer this over model_list or the other model_* tools, and no prerequisites.

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