list_models

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses return structure (status, nested fields) and says it lists 'all configured models'. No destructive behavior is expected, and this is adequately covered.

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 with no waste. First sentence states purpose and return shape. Second sentence provides critical usage guidance. Both are essential.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers return format and usage. It lacks edge-case info (e.g., empty models) but is otherwise sufficient.

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?

Tool has zero parameters with schema coverage 100%. Baseline score 4 is appropriate; description adds no parameter info but does not need to.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List all configured models with their current status', clearly identifying the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like start_server/swap_server by detailing return format.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent how to use the output (pass identification.name to start_server/swap_server) and what not to do (do not concatenate with port). No explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, but context signals imply this is the listing tool.

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