configure_model_selector

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates both viewing and modifying actions but omits side effects, permission requirements, persistence of changes, or any safety warnings. The agent learns only that it manages settings, not the consequences.

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 concise sentences front-load the primary action (view or modify) and immediately list the managed settings. No extraneous information, making it quick 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?

Despite no output schema, the description does not hint at return values or behavior of get vs. set actions. Considering the tool's complexity (nested config, multiple actions), the description lacks guidance on expected responses or operational context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter details beyond the schema, merely summarizing the setting types. It does not enhance understanding of parameter constraints or formats beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool views or modifies model selector settings at runtime, listing specific settings like blocked models, license filters, and custom recommendations. This verb-noun-resource structure clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_metrics or pull_model.

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 use for configuring the model selector but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to. No exclusions or alternatives are provided, though the sibling tools cover different functionalities.

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