Get Default Model

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that ('configured default model', 'selected CLI profile'), but does not disclose edge-case behavior such as what happens when no default is configured or when a profile is missing.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero redundancy. Every word adds meaning and the primary action and target resource are immediately clear.

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 low-complexity read-only tool with full schema coverage, strong annotations, and an output schema present, the description is sufficient. No critical information needed for the agent to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 100%, and each parameter (baseUrl, profile, frontendUrl) already has a clear explanation with defaulting behavior. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so it relies appropriately on the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('configured default model') and ties it to the selected CLI profile. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like models_list, which lists all models, and config_profiles, which manages profiles.

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 gives clear context: use this to retrieve the default model associated with a CLI profile. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is specific enough for an agent to select this tool for the intended read operation.

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