query_specific_model

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions the API key requirement but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only or destructive, nor does it address rate limits or other side effects.

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 sentences front-loaded with the core action, no wasted words, and efficiently covers the essentials.

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?

The description covers purpose, parameter types, and auth; but lacks explicit mention of the return value (expected model response), which would improve completeness given the absence of an output schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., identifier types are already in the schema description).

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 action ('Send a design prompt') and the target ('a specific model via OpenRouter'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing specificity ('specific model') and alternative identifier formats.

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 targeting a particular model (vs. siblings like get_best_design_model) and mentions a prerequisite (OPENROUTER_API_KEY), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or list exclusion criteria.

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