get_model_params

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the return format verbatim, gotchas about select-type params and optional-with-default params, and error condition. It does not mention destructive actions or auth, but as a read-only fetch, that is implied.

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?

The description is well-structured with overview, step context, gotchas, args, and returns. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value given the need to explain gotchas and contract.

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?

Given no output schema, the description provides return structure. One param is well explained. The tool is part of a sequence, and the description explains its role fully. No missing critical information.

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?

Only one parameter (model_id) with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds meaning: 'Catalog model id from list_models, e.g. "pixio/flux-1/schnell".' This provides useful context beyond the schema.

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 clearly states 'Fetch the exact input schema for one Pixio model' and positions it as step 2 of a three-call contract (list_models -> get_model_params -> generate). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_models and generate.

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 explicitly says 'Step 2 of the three-call contract' and provides critical gotchas for building params for generate(). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the contract implies its specific role. It also mentions error behavior for unknown model_id.

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