search_models

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

No annotations are provided, but the description fully discloses behavioral traits: read-only, network-only, no ComfyUI required, no downloads. It also describes the return format (ranked list with modelId, author, etc.), exceeding expectations.

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 five sentences, each serving a purpose: purpose, constraints, output, usage flow, and sibling differentiation. No unnecessary words; 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 complexity (3 params, 1 required, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: search scope, constraints, output, and how to use results. It is fully 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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the result to the download_model tool and explaining the return fields, justifying a 4.

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 it searches HuggingFace Hub for models usable in ComfyUI, listing specific types (checkpoints, LoRAs, VAEs, ControlNets). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool search_custom_nodes, which is for custom nodes.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'For packs of custom nodes (not models) use search_custom_nodes.' Also clarifies it is read-only, network-only, does not require ComfyUI, and does not download anything.

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