prune_models

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does substantial work: it discloses the destructive scope ("deletes the rest"), the safety guardrail set (keep[], default_model, loaded models, keep_recent), and the dry-run default. It omits recovery/permission implications and what the dry_run report looks like.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the safe default, then the retention rule. No filler and every sentence carries operational information.

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 destructive bulk tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety default, and retention adequately. The remaining gap is that two of the six parameters (the age/usage retention filters) and the shape of the dry-run report are not described, which slightly underspecifies pruning behavior.

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 coverage is moderate (67%), and the description adds real value for dry_run by explaining its default-on reporting semantics beyond the bare schema default. However it never mentions the unused_days or max_age_days retention parameters, so its stated "always keeps" list is incomplete relative to the actual retention logic.

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 ("Bulk-delete old models") plus a scope qualifier ("from an ollama provider"), which is clearly distinct from the single-model siblings delete_model and unload_model. An agent can identify the operation 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?

Explains the dry_run=true default workflow ("only reports candidates") and the conditions under which deletion actually occurs with dry_run=false. It does not explicitly name delete_model/unload_model as alternatives or state when not to use the bulk path, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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