Skip to main content
Glama

route_best_model

Read-onlyIdempotent

Recommends the best AI provider for a given task type by scoring providers on capability match, free-tier preference, and known strengths. Accepts optional constraints to refine routing.

Instructions

Recommend the best AI provider for a given task type.

Uses the public kbarbel640-del/ai-provider-registry to score providers by capability match, free-tier preference, and known provider strengths.

Args: task_type: Task category — chat, code, reasoning, vision, search, embeddings, image, or tools. constraints: Optional routing constraints: - prefer_free (bool): Prefer free-tier providers. - exclude_providers (list[str]): Provider ids to skip. - api_style (str): Required API style (e.g. openai).

Returns: JSON string with top recommendation and up to four alternatives.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_typeYes
constraintsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. Description adds context about using a public registry and scoring criteria, which adds value beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then source, then args in structured format. Clear but could be slightly more concise without losing clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, inputs (with options), source, and return format. With output schema present, return details are sufficient. No missing critical aspects for a recommendation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, description extensively explains task_type values and constraints fields, adding meaning beyond the schema's minimal type info. Return format also described.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the tool recommends the best AI provider for a task type, using specific verb 'recommend' and resource 'best AI provider'. Distinguishes from siblings like list_available_providers which merely lists providers.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implies usage for choosing a provider but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives like list_available_providers for just listing. No exclusions mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/kbarbel640-del/trinitas-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server