swap_model

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

Discloses key behaviors: unloads current model, loads requested, waits for health endpoint. No annotations provided, so description carries burden; it does well but could mention potential service disruption.

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?

Very concise: three sentences plus args. Front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers swap process and readiness check. Doesn't mention error handling or non-existent models, but output schema exists to capture return. Fairly complete for a simple swap tool.

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?

Parameter 'model' is described as 'Alias of the model to load', adding meaning beyond the schema's string type. With 0% schema coverage, this is essential and adequate.

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 tool swaps to a different llama.cpp model, unloading current and loading new, with readiness check. It distinguishes from siblings like create_model_config, get_current_model, list_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?

The description implies when to use (loading a different model) but lacks explicit when-not or alternative guidance. No mention of prerequisites or comparison with siblings.

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