novai_cheapest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the data source ('live first-party price leaderboard'), which adds useful context, but does not describe what is returned (e.g., model details, price fields), handling of missing categories, or that it is a read-only lookup.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose without any filler. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's function.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It conveys purpose and data source but omits important context such as accepted category values, the default category, and the shape of the returned result.

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 single 'category' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only references 'a category' without listing valid categories, clarifying the default ('Chat / LLM'), or explaining whether omission selects a default category.

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 that the tool returns the cheapest model in a category from a live first-party price leaderboard. It identifies the resource and distinguishing quality (cheapest), but does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like novai_pricing_feed or novai_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 phrase 'in a category' implies usage for finding the lowest-priced model within a category, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as novai_pricing_feed or novai_free_models. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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