anthropic_list_models

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or whether results are cached/live. For a read-only listing tool this is thin but not contradictory.

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 no filler or redundancy. The scope qualifier ('available via the Anthropic API') is placed where it matters.

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?

The tool is simple and annotations cover the safety profile, but with no output schema the description should indicate what the listing returns (model ids, display names, context limits?) and whether it is paginated. Those gaps are minor for a model-list endpoint but leave the agent guessing about the response.

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 0%, and the description never mentions the single required parameter. The only hint about credentials is the phrase 'via the Anthropic API', which vaguely implies the api_key is a provider credential, but the description does not state that it is required, how to obtain it, or whether it is passed per-call.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Claude models') scoped to the Anthropic API, which implicitly separates it from the many sibling list-models tools (openai_list_models, groq_list_models, mistral_list_models, cohere_list_models). It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the provider qualifier makes the identity unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of what to do with the result (e.g., pick a model id for anthropic_create_message), and no exclusions. An agent must infer the purpose entirely from the name and one sentence.

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