get_model_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' conveys a read-only operation, and 'open model' implies a prerequisite, but the description does not disclose error behavior, whether the model must already be open, or how counts are computed. It is 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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence states the core purpose and then lists the exact data returned. There is no filler, repetition of the tool name, or unnecessary context.

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-parameter read tool with no output schema, this description is largely complete: it identifies the required input and enumerates the return contents. It omits minor details like error cases or prerequisites, but those are not critical for a straightforward getter.

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%, but the description adds meaning by clarifying that model_id refers to an open model and that the result contains detailed metadata for that one model. It does not provide format, examples, or validation details, but for a single string parameter it is minimally sufficient.

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 names a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('one open model'), and enumerates the returned fields (kind, name, code, file, DBMS, counts). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_open_models, which would return summaries of multiple models.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_open_models, model_snapshot, or inspect_schema. 'One open model' implies it targets a single model by ID, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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