Inspect server model settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and closed-world behavior, but the description adds substantial non-obvious context: it reads an in-memory snapshot rather than the current policy file, requires a server restart after file changes, creates no session, contacts no provider, and does not verify which model the host executed.

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?

Front-loads the purpose and scope, then concisely groups usage routing into bullets and behavioral caveats into tight sentences. Every sentence adds distinct value with no repetition or wasted space.

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 output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers what is read, when to use it, alternatives, and important behavioral caveats, making it complete for a zero-argument inspection tool.

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 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description confirms 'takes no arguments,' which is consistent with the empty schema and leaves no parameter ambiguity.

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: reads server-wide model settings for every stage, listing provider, model IDs, and reasoning. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming get_qa_orchestration(run_id) and start_qa_orchestration as alternative tools for different needs.

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?

Explicitly says to use it to inspect the policy loaded for new sessions and notes it takes no arguments. It routes the agent clearly: existing session/current-stage policy uses get_qa_orchestration, and creating a session with these settings uses start_qa_orchestration.

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