List Gemini Models

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It simply states the tool lists models without mentioning return format, pagination, or whether it's read-only. For a simple list operation, this is a significant gap, though the operation is inherently safe.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function without fluff. It's front-loaded and efficient.

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 an output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers the core functionality. It doesn't elaborate on usage context, but given the simplicity, it's sufficient.

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 parametersтное schema is empty, so the description doesn't need to add parameter meaning. Baseline for 0 params is 4; the description correctly omits any param details.

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 'List available Gemini models and their descriptions' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('list') and resource ('Gemini models'). It unambiguously distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like gemini_chat or gemini_prompt_assistant, which perform actions rather than enumeration.

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. While its purpose is self-evident, it lacks any explicit context or exclusions, such as whether it should be used before invoking chat tools or whether it lists all models or only certain ones.

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