list_models

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by specifying it is free and requires no API key, and lists the exact information returned (strengths, ratios, resolutions, reference limits), going beyond 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?

The description is a single sentence that conveys all essential information without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description provides sufficient context: it lists what models are available and their attributes, and notes it is free. No key missing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It mentions 'image and video models', hinting at the mediaType parameter, but does not explain the 'all' option or provide details on how to use the parameter. The enum values are self-explanatory, but more explicit guidance would help.

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 action (List), resource (LemGen models), and details (strengths, ratios, resolutions, reference limits). It distinguishes from sibling tools (generate_image, generate_video, etc.) by being a read-only listing tool.

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 implies use for checking available models before generation, noting it is free and requires no API key. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or direct comparison to sibling tools like search_gallery.

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