List loaded LM Studio models

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

The description discloses 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait, but with no annotations, it carries the full burden. It does not mention return format, possible empty lists, or any side effects, though the operation is simple and safe.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and clearly worded. Every word is purposeful with no filler or redundancy.

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, read-only tool, the description adequately covers the core purpose. The output schema presumably handles return values, so no further detail is required. However, it lacks broader context about how 'loaded in memory' relates to other LM Studio operations.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't add parameter-specific information, but none is needed since the tool requires no inputs.

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 'List model instances currently loaded in memory' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lmstudio_list_models by emphasizing 'loaded in memory' and the 'Read-only' nature.

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 when to use this tool (to see currently loaded models) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It lacks a direct comparison to lmstudio_list_models or guidance on when not to use it.

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