ollama_list_models

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the operation is a 'List' of models and clarifies 'local system', implying a read-only action, but it does not add additional behavioral context such as return format, potential network calls, or side effects. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 is concise, front-loaded with the action ('List'), and contains no superfluous information. It is highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and scope ('all available models on the local system'). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool does, though it does not explicitly state the return format, which is implied by 'List'. Given the simplicity, this is reasonable 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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is an empty object with 100% schema coverage. Since there are no parameters to explain, the description adds no parameter semantics, but the baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter information.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all available Ollama models on the local system', which precisely defines the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (like ollama_generate_text or ollama_pull_model) by specifying it lists models rather than performing generation or pulling.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios like 'Use this before generating to see available models' or any exclusions. The only implication is via the verb 'List', but no concrete usage context is provided.

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