get-model-info

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns detailed information and the input parameters schema, and that it is a prerequisite step before running a model. However, it does not describe response structure or error behavior, leaving some gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then workflow. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides enough context for a simple lookup tool: what it does, when to call it, and how parameters relate to search results. It could mention return format more explicitly, but the phrase 'detailed information' and 'input parameters schema' gives a reasonable picture.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions at 100% coverage. The description adds valuable context by explaining that these values come from search results and are used to get details for the best matching model, reinforcing the workflow and data provenance.

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 a specific action ('Get detailed information about a specific Replicate model') and a specific resource ('including its input parameters schema'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing per-model detail rather than listing or running models.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Call this AFTER search-models' and 'before running it.' This positions the tool in a clear workflow relative to search-models and run-model, which are sibling tools.

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