list_models

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the underlying API call (/v1/models) and implies read-only behavior via '查询'. However, it does not mention authentication, rate limits, or what happens when provider is omitted, leaving gaps for a networked operation.

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 includes both the action and the endpoint. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no redundant content.

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 simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly complete: it names the operation and the API call. It could briefly mention whether the parameter is required or defaults to current provider, but this is a minor gap for a straightforward list operation.

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 already fully documents the provider parameter with a description. The tool description mentions 'current provider' but doesn't add details about how provider is used or defaults. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3 and the description adds minimal semantic value beyond 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 clearly states the tool lists models supported by the current provider, with the specific API endpoint /v1/models. The verb '查询' (query) and resource '模型列表' are specific. It is obviously distinct from sibling tools that analyze images.

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 context is clear: use when you need to see which models the current provider supports. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but siblings are unrelated so no exclusion is needed. The optional provider parameter and mention of 'current provider' imply default behavior, though not explicit.

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