Discover which AI models are available through the installed bridge, enabling you to identify supported options before routing tasks between connected agents.
List models exposed by the installed bridge.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.18Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict it. It adds the scoping detail that models come from the installed bridge, but it does not disclose return format or any other behavioral traits.
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 sentence that front-loads the action and stays free of redundancy. Every word earns its place.
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?
The tool is a simple read-only list operation with no parameters and no output schema, so the description is nearly sufficient. It could be slightly stronger by noting that the listed model identifiers are what set_model consumes, but this is a minor gap.
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 zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Per the 0-parameter baseline, this is adequate.
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 and resource ('List models') and scopes the source ('exposed by the installed bridge'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_model, list_projects, and list_threads.
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 intended use—discover available models before selecting one with set_model—is implied by the tool's name and sibling set, but not explicitly stated. No when-to-use conditions or exclusions are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.