list_models

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. "Live" and "authenticated" are the only behavioral hints; it does not say whether this is a safe read, whether results are cached, what the authentication prerequisite entails, or whether calling it has side effects or rate limits.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and provenance are established immediately. It is minimal but not padded.

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?

This is a simple read tool with one optional boolean and no output schema, so the description is close to sufficient. However, the meaning of `refresh` and a hint at the return shape (list of model identifiers) are missing, leaving a real gap for an agent deciding how to call it.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter `refresh` is never mentioned in the description, so an agent cannot tell whether it forces a cache bypass, re-authentication, or re-fetch. The description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 ("List") and resource ("live model directory") plus the source system ("Antigravity CLI"), which is unambiguous against siblings like deep_search or web_lookup. It does not need sibling routing since no other tool lists models, but it also does not explicitly say so.

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?

No indication of when an agent should call this versus another discovery path, and no guidance on when the `refresh` flag matters. "authenticated" hints at a prerequisite but the description never states what that requires or how to satisfy it.

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