Listar modelos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering safety and non-mutating behavior. The description adds that it returns name, UUID, and metadata, which is useful but minimal. It does not disclose ordering, pagination, or potential failures, though for a read-only listing that is acceptable given annotations.

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?

Description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action verb 'Lista'. Every word adds value, and it fully conveys the tool's purpose without fluff.

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 the low complexity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides enough information for an agent to understand the operation and its expected result. It lacks details like whether the list is sorted or what 'metadata' includes, but these are minor for a simple listing 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 per the rubric. The description does not need to explain any parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. No additional semantics required.

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 the tool lists open models ('modelos abertos') with name, internal Solibri UUID, and metadata. It is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes itself from siblings like solibri_get_model_metadata (which deals with a single model's metadata) and solibri_list_workspace.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios such as needing to enumerate models before opening one, nor does it contrast with solibri_get_model_metadata or solibri_get_model_components. Usage context is entirely implicit.

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