list_available_models

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates the tool performs a read-only listing operation and adds context about account-specific Pro models. It does not describe the output format, but for a simple listing tool with no parameters, this is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, scope, and usage context with no wasted words. It is highly efficient and 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 zero parameters, no output schema, and a simple list operation, the description is nearly complete. It could explicitly state that the returned model names are valid values for the `model` parameter, but the implication is clear from the usage hint. The tool is simple enough that this short description suffices.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter descriptions to provide, and the description adds value by explaining the purpose and usage context rather than repeating schema information.

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 states a specific action (list) and a specific resource (Pro models available in your Perplexity account). It also differentiates from sibling tools by positioning itself as the preparatory step before setting the `model` parameter in search/chat.

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 phrase 'antes de fijar model en search/chat' gives clear temporal context for when to use this tool and implies it should be used before search/chat operations. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools beyond the search/chat reference.

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