List available models

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds beyond that by explaining that with an OpenRouter key, it sends a minimal request and reports the model version, which is a behavioral nuance not captured by the annotations. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the main function, explaining why usage is appropriate, and detailing behavior with an OpenRouter key. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and free of filler.

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 simplicity (no params, clear output), the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, the use case, and the behavior variation with OpenRouter. The output schema exists to detail the return structure, so the description doesn't need to describe it in text.

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 0 parameters, and the schema documentation coverage is 100%. The description doesn't need to add parameter details because there are none. It does explain what the tool returns (model list with release dates or model version), which adds 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 states a clear purpose: to list the models available to the API key, including release dates. It distinguishes itself from siblings like jev_classify or jev_score, which perform different actions, by focusing on model discovery and key verification.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool: to confirm the key works and to find a model id before assuming one exists. It also explains the difference between using an OpenRouter key and a direct key, providing clear context for when this tool is needed.

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