sigma_list_data_models

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a behavioral detail about summary_only=true producing a concise response, which is beyond the schema. However, it does not disclose limit behavior, pagination, or what the response contains, so additional transparency is limited.

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 two sentences: the first states the tool's core function, the second offers a practical usage tip. No redundant words or filler, and the most important information is 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 low complexity and the presence of annotations and an output schema, the description covers the primary listing purpose. However, it fails to clarify the role of the limit parameter, does not distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling sigma_list_all_data_models, and provides no information about pagination or result format, leaving moderate gaps.

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 must compensate. It explains the purpose of summary_only (concise token-efficient response) but completely omits the 'limit' parameter, leaving its meaning and behavior undocumented. Partial compensation only.

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 action ('List all data models') and scope ('in the organization'). However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling tool 'sigma_list_all_data_models', which likely has a similar purpose, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 only usage guidance is a parameter tip ('Pass summary_only=True for concise token-efficient response'). No context is provided about when to use this tool versus related listing tools like sigma_list_data_model_elements or sigma_list_all_data_models, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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