aa_list_media_models

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the tool returns a JSON array of rankings and describes parameters, but does not disclose read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or data freshness. Adequate but not rich.

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 concise and well-structured, using a clean docstring format with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides value with no 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?

Given 3 optional parameters, no required args, and an output schema existing, the description is nearly complete. It explains all parameters and return format. Minor gap: does not specify ordering direction (e.g., descending Elo) or any prerequisites.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter: modality with five specific values, top_n with default 10, and include_categories with context that it applies only to text-to-image and text-to-video. Adds significant meaning beyond schema.

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 lists top-ranked multimodal/media models by Elo ratings, specifying the verb 'List' and the resource. It naturally distinguishes from siblings like aa_list_llms (LLMs) and aa_get_model (specific 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 provides clear context for using the tool—listing media model rankings—but does not explicitly state when not to use it or offer alternatives. No exclusions or comparative guidance given.

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