jev_list_models

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that the tool 'Costs no tokens' and scopes the results to 'this account', which are not in annotations. It also clarifies that versioned ids are accepted even if absent from the list, though that's aimed at sibling tools rather than this tool's own behavior. This is substantive additional value, but it stops short of describing output structure or edge cases.

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?

Three tightly written sentences: the first states the core function, the second provides usage guidance with a concrete alias and versioned id example, and the third adds the coverage caveat and token cost. Every sentence earns its place, with the core statement front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter tool that already has an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what the tool returns, when to use it, why the alias is risky, and a reassurance about token cost. The reference to a sibling tool completes the picture.

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 tool has exactly zero parameters and an empty input schema, so the baseline of 4 applies by rule. The description naturally includes no parameter notes, but it also doesn't need to—there is nothing to document.

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 leads with a clear verb ('List') and specifies exactly what is returned: model names and aliases for this account, each with description and release date. There is no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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?

It explicitly instructs the agent to use this tool before pinning a version, explains that 'jev-latest' moves with releases, and directs the agent to pass a versioned id like 'jev-1.13.0' to 'jev_evaluate' instead. This is actionable, context-rich guidance.

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