search_models

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

Annotations already establish this as a read-only, non-destructive operation, and the description adds non-obvious behavior: all query words must match, allowed_only=false has different permission implications, and captured profiles may include Workshop models absent from the local VPK index. It still omits any explanation of refresh/caching behavior.

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 three compact sentences with the main scope stated first, followed by the mode caveat and an important index caveat. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover safety, but the tool has five undocumented parameters. The description covers the most important search semantics but leaves refresh and pagination behavior unexplained, so it is only minimally complete.

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% for five parameters, so the description must compensate, but it only explains allowed_only and query matching semantics. It says nothing about limit, offset, or refresh, leaving most parameters semantically undocumented.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it finds models, and clarifies the default scope is server-allowed models. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as model_info, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It gives clear usage context for the key mode switch: default behavior searches server-allowed models, while allowed_only=false searches installed models without implying permission. It does not mention when to use sibling tools like model_info instead, so it is strong but not complete.

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