Find models

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It accurately discloses that the result is a compact summary per model and points to get_model for more detail, but it does not mention ordering, defaults, pagination, or rate limits. These are not misleading gaps, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler. The main action and scope are front-loaded, and the pointer to get_model is placed efficiently at the end.

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 read-only search tool with 8 optional and well-documented parameters, the description gives enough orientation to call it correctly. It could describe the shape of the compact summary or default ordering, but those are optional refinements rather than invocation blockers.

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 covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's list of filter dimensions loosely maps to the schema parameters but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Search and filter') and names the resource ('models across all providers'), then lists the key filtering dimensions. It also distinguishes itself from get_model by stating it returns a compact summary rather than full details.

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 clearly communicates this is the tool for broad searching/filtering and directly points to get_model for full individual details. It does not explicitly contrast with compare_models or list_providers, but the core use case is well established.

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