open_model

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait ('May return 202 if model is loading'), indicating asynchronous behavior. However, it does not elaborate on other aspects like required permissions, side effects, or what happens when the model is already open. No annotations are present, so this carries the full burden, but the information is minimal.

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 sentence that is concise and includes an important caveat about the 202 response. No redundant information is present.

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?

While the description covers the basic purpose and a behavioral note, it lacks context about the implications of opening a model, such as whether it triggers any background processes or how to verify success. Given no output schema, the description could provide more completeness, but for a simple tool it is minimally adequate.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema with workspaceId and modelId details. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Per guidelines, with 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 ('Open (wake up) a model') with a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like close_model and show_models, which have different purposes.

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 implies usage for opening or waking up a model but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as checking model status with show_modelstatus first, or when not to use it.

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