models_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the function, not whether it is read-only, destructive, requires authentication, or has rate limits. A get tool is likely safe, but not explicitly stated.

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, efficient sentence of 9 words with no filler. It is front-loaded and every word is useful.

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?

For a simple get tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter usage. However, it lacks information about response format, error handling, or prerequisites, which would be needed for full completeness.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning by explaining that 'model' can be an id or slug, and if slug then 'project' is needed. This clarifies the relationship between parameters beyond the bare schema, though format details are missing.

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 'Get one model by id, or by slug plus project' clearly states the tool's action (get), resource (model), and two modes of identification (id or slug+project). This distinguishes it from siblings like models_list (lists all) and model_download (downloads a model).

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 usage when needing a single model by identifier, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like models_list or when not to use it (e.g., for batch operations). No exclusions or context for choosing between the two query methods.

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