agnes_models

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool lists models with limits, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly mention safety, idempotency, or any potential side effects. For a simple listing, this is acceptable but lacks full transparency.

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 and then usage guidance. Every word earns its place; no wasted text.

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 tool has 0 parameters, no output schema, and is a simple list operation, the description fully covers what the tool does and its role among siblings. It mentions the three categories and limits, which is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 input schema has no parameters (0 params), so baseline score is 4. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains (models with limits and categories), which is meaningful given no output schema exists. It does not need to discuss parameters.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'available Agnes AI models' with categories (text/chat, image, video) and what is included (their limits). It distinguishes from siblings by indicating it is useful 'before calling the other tools', making its purpose and relationship clear.

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 'Useful to discover model names before calling the other tools', which tells the agent when to use this tool (as a prerequisite for siblings). It does not provide explicit when-not scenarios, but the context is strong enough for correct usage selection.

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