list_loaded

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' implies a non-mutating read operation, and 'claim/busy detail' names the returned state, but it does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, how claim/busy is determined, or any blocking/load behavior. Adequate but not richly transparent.

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 sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds the key detail. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 parameterless list operation, the description covers the core semantics: what is listed and what detail is included. However, because there is no output schema or annotations, 'claim/busy detail' remains somewhat vague, and no sibling routing is provided. Still, the tool is simple enough that an agent can invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are necessary for invocation; the empty schema already covers this completely.

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 opens with the imperative 'List' and identifies the specific resource ('models currently resident in VRAM'), plus a distinguishing output detail ('claim/busy detail'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like list_claims, which likely lists claim records rather than VRAM-resident 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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and names no alternatives or exclusions. With siblings like list_claims, vram_status, and ensure_free, an agent must infer when this tool is the right choice, rather than being directed.

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