List callable SpicyAPI models

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds real behavioral context: returned schemas are plain JSON Schema with display-only and rate-card annotations stripped, and some input values change the price. It stops short of disclosing pagination or result-size behavior for a list endpoint.

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?

Four front-loaded sentences that each do work: discovery, schema reuse, schema sanitization, and pricing/quote caution. Tight and readable, though the pricing note is slightly wordy relative to its importance.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the workflow (list, schema reuse, quoting) plus the pricing caveat. It remains thin on what the filter parameters actually filter, leaving a small gap for a 6-parameter list 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, but it explains only includeSchema (and its role in avoiding a model_get call). task, search, modality, provider, and includeExamples are given no meaning anywhere; includeExamples is never mentioned at all.

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 and resource ("Discover enabled models and account-specific prices") and distinguishes itself from model_get by explaining that a single model's schema comes from a separate call. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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 routes between alternatives: use includeSchema to avoid "another model_get call," use task_create for the exact request quote, and use pricing entries for comparisons instead of self-calculating. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both present.

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