List callable SpicyAPI models

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

Beyond readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses that returned schemas are plain JSON Schema with display-only and rate-card annotations stripped, and that some input values can change the final price. This manages expectations about the data and cautions against using list pricing as the final charge.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed only by high-value caveats. No filler or repetition of annotation/schema content.

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 behavioral caveats and sibling routing are strong, but with six undocumented optional parameters and no parameter descriptions, an agent cannot fully determine how to select a single model or use filters. Basic model-list calls are covered, but deeper use requires inference.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters, but it only explicitly covers includeSchema. The meaning of 'task' (how the 'selected model' is specified), search, modality, provider, and includeExamples is left to inference or the output 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?

States a concrete verb and resource: discover enabled models and account-specific prices. It differentiates itself from model_get by noting that includeSchema can avoid a separate model_get call.

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 contrasts with model_get ('without another model_get call') and routes exact-price confirmation to task_create. It tells agents to treat pricing entries as comparative, not authoritative charges, which is clear when-to-use guidance.

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