Lists all models available on a ComfyUI server, optionally filtered by checkpoint, LoRA, VAE, ControlNet, upscale, embedding, or clip type to identify usable assets.
List models available on the ComfyUI server (from object_info). Optionally filter by type: checkpoint, lora, vae, controlnet, upscale, embedding, clip. Requires COMFYUI_HOST.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | No | Filter by model type (omit for all types) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description does carry the burden, and it discloses the underlying source (object_info) and an environment prerequisite (COMFYUI_HOST). However it does not state that the operation is read-only, nor anything about return shape or whether the model list is cached/live.
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 tight sentences with purpose first, then the optional filter, then the prerequisite. The enumerated type list mildly duplicates the schema enum, which is the only waste.
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 single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, data source, and the host prerequisite. Missing only an explicit read-only statement and any hint about response contents, which is acceptable here.
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% and the enum fully documents valid values, so the schema already carries semantics. The description merely restates the same enum list without adding format or behavioral meaning beyond it.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("List models available on the ComfyUI server") and names the data source (object_info). It is distinguishable from siblings like get_model_info or check_model_exists, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.
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?
Usage is implied by "Optionally filter by type (omit for all types)" and the prerequisite "Requires COMFYUI_HOST" is stated, but no alternative tool is named and no when-not guidance is given (e.g. when to use get_model_info or check_model_exists instead).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.