list_open_models

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of disclosure. It clearly scopes the operation to currently open models and lists the output fields, giving a solid picture of behavior. It does not explicitly state that the operation is non-destructive or what happens with an empty session, but 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, scope, and return fields without any filler. Every word contributes useful information.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns. It is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly, though it could mention the possibility of an empty list or whether results are ordered.

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 tool has zero parametersable, so the schema already provides complete coverage. No parameter explanation is needed in the 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all models currently open in PowerDesigner') and enumerates exactly what is returned: kind, name, code, file path, DBMS, and object counts. This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like get_model_info or list_model_backups.

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 the tool: whenever you need to see all currently open models. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, such as when a specific model's details are needed instead.

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