list_enabled_providers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It conveys the relevant behavioral distinction that results are limited to enabled providers and can be filtered, but says nothing about return format, ordering, or what happens to unknown names. It is safe to assume read-only, but that is inferred, not stated.

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 the core action first and the optional filter second. No waste, nothing buried.

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?

For a simple read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the action and the filter but leaves the meaning of the 'purpose' enum and the sibling differentiation to inference.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description restates the 'providers' filter but adds no syntax or format detail, and the 'purpose' enum parameter (use/configure) is not mentioned at all in the description.

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 ('enabled model providers'), and the modifier 'enabled' distinguishes it from the general list_model_providers sibling. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling, so an agent must infer the difference.

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 phrase 'optionally restricted to a given set of provider names' implies one usage pattern, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over list_model_providers, list_enabled_models, or list_model_provider_descriptors. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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