list_models

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the scope 'current session' and clarifies that only model IDs are returned, not full model details. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, or how workspace_id affects behavior, which would be useful context given the optional parameter.

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 of ten words, front-loaded with the action verb and resource. It contains no filler or redundant phrases. Every word contributes value.

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 that an output schema exists and the readOnlyHint annotation is present, the description is mostly sufficient. The main gap is that 'current session' is ambiguous, and the optional workspace_id parameter may modify the scope but the description does not clarify this relationship. However, the schema's parameter description partially addresses this, so the tool is still usable with less risk.

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 schema fully describes the sole parameter workspace_id, including its purpose, MCP 2026-07-28 requirement, and legacy compatibility. The tool description adds no additional information about this parameter, so the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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 'model IDs' within the scope of the 'current session'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_variables, list_modules, and list_connectors, which target different resources. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or when not to use it. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and resource type. Sibling tools like list_variables are not referenced for comparison.

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